[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



     MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, VETERANS AFFAIRS, AND RELATED AGENCIES   
                        APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2026 
_______________________________________________________________________


                                 HEARINGS

                                 BEFORE A

                           SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE

                       COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                         HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                     ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                              FIRST SESSION
                                _________

         SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, VETERANS AFFAIRS,  
                           AND RELATED AGENCIES

                     JOHN R. CARTER, Texas, Chairman

  JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida       DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida                        
  MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi        SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia                    
  RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana            VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas                     
  STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma       MIKE LEVIN, California                         
  SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida           HENRY CUELLAR, Texas                    
  MARK ALFORD, Missouri                                  
    Vice Chair                                       
  NICK LaLOTA, New York                                                  

  NOTE: Under committee rules, Mr. Cole, as chairman of the full 
committee, and Ms. DeLauro, as ranking minority member of the full 
committee, are authorized to sit as members of all subcommittees.

                     Justin Masucci, Jason Wheelock,
                           and Arianna Delgado
                            Subcommittee Staff
                                _________ 
                                
                                  PART 1

                                                                   Page
  Innovative Techniques in Military Construction--U.S. Army Corps
   of Engineers..................................................     1 
  Quality of Life in the Military................................    55  
  

                [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]                       

                               _________

          Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
                                
                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

62-456                     WASHINGTON : 2026   


















































                      COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                              
                      TOM COLE, Oklahoma, Chairman


  HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky,                 ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut,                 
    Chair Emeritus                           Ranking Member            
  ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama              STENY H. HOYER, Maryland                          
  MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho                MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio               
  JOHN R. CARTER, Texas                    JAMES E. CLYBURN, South Carolina     
  KEN CALVERT, California                  SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia               
  MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida               BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota                
  STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas                   DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida         
  CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN,        HENRY CUELLAR, Texas                            
    Tennessee                              CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine           
  DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio                     MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois               
  ANDY HARRIS, Maryland                    GRACE MENG, New York            
  MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada                   MARK POCAN, Wisconsin             
  DAVID G. VALADAO, California             PETE AGUILAR, California     
  DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington                 LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 
  JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan              BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey       
  JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida              NORMA J. TORRES, California                         
  BEN CLINE, Virginia                      ED CASE, Hawaii           
  GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania          ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York  
  ASHLEY HINSON, Iowa                      JOSH HARDER, California       
  TONY GONZALES, Texas                     LAUREN UNDERWOOD, Illinois                               
  JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana                  SUSIE LEE, Nevada                     
  MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas                     JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York              
  MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi               MIKE LEVIN, California                
  RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana                   MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania          
  ANDREW S. CLYDE, Georgia                 VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas                                 
  STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma              FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana        
  SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida                  MARIE GLUESENKAMP PEREZ,                       
  JAKE ELLZEY, Texas                         Washington      
  JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona                  GLENN IVEY, Maryland                         
  CHUCK EDWARDS, North Carolina                                                   
  MARK ALFORD, Missouri                                            
  NICK LaLOTA, New York                                          
  DALE W. STRONG, Alabama                                               
  CELESTE MALOY, Utah                                                            
  RILEY M. MOORE, West Virginia                                              

                Susan Ross, Chief Clerk and Staff Director

                                   (II)

 
                        INNOVATIVE TECHNIQUES IN
                         MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

                              ----------                              

                                           Tuesday, March 11, 2025.

                      U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

    Mr. Carter. This committee will come to order.
    In today's hearing we will examine opportunities for the 
use of innovative technologies in military construction. But 
first I want to take a moment to welcome new subcommittee 
members.
    For the majority I would like to welcome Representative 
Alford from Minnesota--Missouri, I am sorry--who will be 
serving as vice chair, and Representative LaLota from New York.
    Joining the subcommittee for the minority from my great 
State of Texas is Ms. Escobar. Welcome, and from California, 
Representative Levin.
    This subcommittee serves the people who serve our nation, 
and provides vital investments for the members of our armed 
services, their families, and veterans. We have a long history 
of bipartisanship on this subcommittee, and I am committed to 
maintaining that tradition in this Congress. I urge all of my 
members of this subcommittee to keep this in mind today and in 
all committee hearings in the future.
    We are here today to examine the potential use of 
innovative technologies for military construction. While 
current military construction possesses and produces high-
quality infrastructure, the construction timelines for projects 
may be lengthy, and may--and many believe that the DoD pays too 
much for what it buys. One study found that military 
construction cost premium was as much as 35 percent for some 
types of facility.
    Given today's fiscal challenges, we must find efficiencies 
that reduce construction timelines and cost. If we harness the 
power of new technologies such as 3D printing, we can deliver 
high-quality infrastructure for our warfighters and their 
families and be better stewards of Texas--of taxpayers' money.
    Joining us today is four distinguished witnesses: Mr. Dave 
Morrow, director of military programs for the U.S. Army Corps 
of Engineers; Mr. Keith Hamilton, chief engineer, Naval 
Facilities Engineering Command; Mr. Thomas Healy, chief 
executive officer for Hyliion Incorporated; and Mr. Brent 
Richardson, principal research scientist of energy and 
infrastructure environment for CNA.
    As a reminder to members, today's panel is here to discuss 
the emerging construction methods, their facilities, 
feasibility, cost effectiveness, and durability. I ask you to 
refrain from discussions not germane to the reasons we are 
here.
    Now I would like to recognize Ms. Wasserman Schultz for her 
opening remarks.
    Pardon my voice. It seems to be going south to Texas. 
[Laughter.]
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. I thank the gentleman for yielding. 
Thank you, Judge Carter. Welcome to our subcommittee's new 
members and to our witnesses.
    I look forward to another year of working together to 
invest in quality services and benefits for our veterans, 
ensure our military readiness, and improve the quality of life 
for our service members and their families.
    I appreciate the interest my friend, Judge Carter, has in 
this important topic, and I look forward to a productive 
conversation about the ways in which this subcommittee can help 
bring innovation into military construction.
    Before I address this topic, however, I want to take us 
back to the last fiscal year's hearings where I, along with 
other Democratic members of this subcommittee, shared our 
concerns with reported proposals for 22 percent cuts to funding 
levels. At that time there was a bipartisan consensus that cuts 
to the vital programs funded in this subcommittee should not 
happen. Yet now, a couple of months into the Trump 
Administration, we are seeing cuts under a different name 
implementing the illegal playbook of Project 2025.
    Under the guise of ``waste, fraud, and abuse,'' the 
Administration is planning to cut 80,000 VA jobs and is 
canceling nearly 600 contracts, endangering veterans' access to 
timely and sufficient care and benefits. Beyond the VA, the 
Administration is firing veterans in numerous agencies across 
the country and cutting other programs that veterans rely on, 
like SNAP and Medicaid. I refuse to let veterans and the direct 
services we provide to them be defined as ``government waste.'' 
That is utterly appalling, and a complete betrayal of the men 
and women who have put their lives on the line in service to 
our country.
    Veterans and people who care for them are not government 
waste. These cuts and firings are causing immediate impacts on 
veterans like Ben, who was recently interviewed by the 
publication, Task & Purpose. Ben is a disabled veteran who had 
a positive job performance review while working at the 
Department of Agriculture, where he helped other veterans with 
grants to fix health and safety hazards in their homes. Yet Ben 
was inexplicably fired, in the careless, cruel approach 
President Trump and Elon Musk have taken to cut jobs across the 
Federal Government.
    Meanwhile, internationally, our allies are left scrambling 
as Secretary Hegseth focuses attention on Fox News culture war 
priorities rather than deterring Russia and our competitors 
abroad. The Secretary spent his first days banning books in DoD 
schools, restoring base names that honor Confederate soldiers, 
and banning qualified individuals who are serving honorably 
from serving in our military just because of their gender 
identity.
    If the goal here today is to promote innovative forms of 
military construction and improve the readiness of our armed 
forces, I would argue that indiscriminately firing 5,400 DoD 
employees is the wrong move. Improving our military 
installations' resiliency against extreme weather should be a 
priority, not firing generals for political grievances.
    Investing in construction methods that could speed the 
delivery of housing for our service members should be a 
priority, not spending nearly $50,000 of taxpayers' money to 
paint the Secretary's government-furnished house and pretending 
it is an emergency.
    Reducing the cost of our military construction projects 
should be a priority, not threatening tariffs on our allies, 
which we know will only cause steel and timber prices to 
skyrocket.
    I am hopeful that we will have a fruitful conversation on 
the ways we can reduce barriers to alternative construction 
methods and drive innovation in military construction. The 
length and expense of the military construction process, as my 
friend, Judge Carter, mentioned, is a challenge, and it impacts 
the number of projects which can be funded in any given year. 
This problem only grows more acute as the services are 
increasingly building in expensive, remote areas like Guam. I 
hope the ideas we discuss here today can be a part of the 
solution to these increasing costs, and to the costs over the 
full life cycle of our military facilities.
    Moreover, we know the devastating impact natural disasters 
had on military bases in recent years, from hurricane damage in 
my home state at Tyndall Air Force Base and MacDill Air Force 
Base after Helene and Milton to the devastation on Guam from 
Typhoon Mawar. We cannot bury our heads in the sand and ignore 
the climate threat to our military installations, as well. 
Investments in resiliency now will save us billions of dollars 
in recovery later on.
    Some alternative building materials like mass timber 
represent a possible solution to making installations more 
resilient to extreme weather events, while also reducing the 
service's carbon footprint and contributions to the climate 
change problem. When it comes to mass timber products, details 
matter. For mass timber to truly be a part of a climate 
solution, it must be sourced in a sustainable way. When this 
does occur, mass timber products provide a benefit of carbon 
storage, as well as reduced carbon emissions compared to 
traditional materials like concrete and steel.
    But I have concerns with how this administration has 
already been stewarding our land and resources. Recklessly 
clear-cutting forests, cutting down old-growth trees, or 
ignoring the Endangered Species Act and other environmental 
laws is short-sighted and dangerous and will not advance our 
goals that we have here in this committee.
    I would like to thank the four witnesses for being here 
today and for their expert testimony.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. Okay, we will now turn to our witnesses for 
today.
    Without objection, your entire written testimony will be 
included in the record.
    I will now recognize each of you for an opening statement, 
and we will then proceed with questions.

                              ----------                              

                                           Tuesday, March 11, 2025.

                      U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

                                WITNESS

DAVE MORROW, DIRECTOR OF MILITARY PROGRAMS, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF 
    ENGINEERS
    Mr. Carter. Mr. Morrow.
    Mr. Morrow. Chairman Carter, Ranking Member Wasserman 
Schultz, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank 
you for this opportunity to discuss the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers' efforts to research and utilize innovative 
technologies, techniques, and materials in military 
construction projects.
    Over the last two-and-a-half centuries the U.S. Army 
engineers have evolved to provide engineering expertise to the 
Army and to respond to the nation's toughest engineering 
challenges. The USACE mission includes civil works, military 
programs, research and development, and disaster response. 
Today I want to focus on our military programs and research and 
development missions.
    We support our combatant commanders in 110 countries around 
the globe through military and international services programs. 
We support three million active duty military, veterans, 
civilians, and their families. USACE relies heavily on the 
private industry to deliver innovative technologies and 
techniques in military construction.
    The Unified Facilities Criteria, or UFC, are developed 
through a tri-service coordination that sets basic technical 
requirements that must be followed to deliver a code-compliant, 
complete, and usable military facility. Any innovative design 
solution that meets the UFC and mission requirements is 
acceptable, and USACE encourages design and construction 
solutions from our industry partners that meet these 
requirements.
    Our research and development mission, vested in our 
Engineering Research and Development Center, or ERDC, is to 
discover, develop, and deliver trusted engineering and 
scientific solutions for the warfighter and the nation. ERDC 
provides engineering technology leadership necessary for force 
protection, force projection, sustainment, and civil works 
missions. The USACE organizational structure supports delivery 
and innovation through 44 districts that execute construction 
projects for the local regions. USACE has regular engagements 
with the other military services, which fosters innovation 
through information sharing and common training opportunities. 
This allows USACE to benefit from the experience of a diverse 
project execution and leverage those lessons in military 
construction.
    So one technology that can be used for expeditionary CONUS 
or MILCON applications is additive construction, or 
construction 3D printing. Additive construction has potential 
to reduce costs, manpower, logistics, and time while opening 
the door for improved and new applications such as 
unconventional countermeasures. ERDC has taken a leading role 
in acceleration of technology transition with the private 
sector. This includes development of the UFC language to allow 
additive construction in 80 percent of the United States and in 
regions where seismic activity is not an issue.
    This is still a developing technology. Pilot projects at 
locations such as Fort Bliss, Camp McGregor, and Tyndall Air 
Force Base have led to increased confidence in additive 
construction and military structures. To expand this technology 
for higher-risk areas, a consolidated testing effort needs to 
be completed.
    ERDC is currently conducting research and field 
demonstration projects on innovative cement solutions utilizing 
non-traditional chemistries. Advantages of these products can 
include rapid-set hardening times, supply chain advantages, and 
activated chemical solutions for protection against specific 
threats. Synthetic polymer materials, called geosynthetics, are 
being designed and manufactured to solve civil engineering 
problems, including separation, filtration, drainage, 
reinforcement, and containment.
    USACE has supported testing and evaluation of mass timber 
materials. We recently designed the Army's first barracks made 
primarily with mass timber structural elements, and are 
soliciting interest in construction of a project at Mountain 
Home Air Force Base calling for the incorporation of mass 
timber design. Utilizing mass timber in these projects may 
reduce construction timelines. Fiber-reinforced polymer 
composites are under investigation to meet military interest in 
corrosion resistance, load maintenance, critical 
infrastructure.
    In an increasingly complex global security environment, our 
commitment to innovation in military construction is not just 
about building structures, it is about building the resilience 
and readiness our forces need to prevail. By working with 
industry to leverage these advancements, we can deliver more 
durable, sustainable, and cost-effective infrastructure for our 
military, ensuring taxpayer dollars are used efficiently while 
equipping our troops with the best facilities in the world.
    Thank you for your time today, and I look forward to your 
questions.
    [The information follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    
                              ----------                              

                                           Tuesday, March 11, 2025.

              NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS COMMAND

                                WITNESS

KEITH HAMILTON, CHIEF ENGINEER, NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS 
    COMMAND
    Mr. Carter. Thank you. Now we will turn to Mr. Hamilton.
    Mr. Hamilton. Thank you, Chairman Carter, Ranking Member 
Wasserman Schultz, distinguished members of the committee. 
Thank you for the opportunity to testify on how Naval 
Facilities Engineering Command, or NAVFAC, is leveraging 
innovative construction techniques and technologies in military 
construction.
    NAVFAC has a worldwide team of dedicated engineers and 
architects, planners, project managers, contracting officers, 
and other professionals who design, maintain, acquire, and 
construct facilities and infrastructure to support our 
warfighters at home and abroad. We are continuously 
collaborating with industry to identify and implement new, 
innovative infrastructure solutions, and to apply industry best 
practices that help make our U.S. warfighters more lethal, 
adaptable, effective, and resilient.
    NAVFAC is actively testing and employing innovative 
technologies, materials, and methods for design and 
construction today, and we are leaning forward to increase 
collaboration with industry, academia, and other government 
partners to identify and leverage future opportunities. I will 
provide a few examples.
    We realize that we must think, act, and operate differently 
in order to meet the many time-critical fleet and Marine Corps 
missions and requirements that we face today. This includes the 
employment of new and innovative solutions to reduce the cost 
and increase the speed of infrastructure project delivery. To 
address this issue head on, we have developed an Acceleration 
and Affordability Campaign Plan, and as a part of implementing 
that plan, and in coordination with our Navy Installations 
Command, we have issued guidance that at the start of every new 
military construction project NAVFAC's planners and engineers 
are required to evaluate whether the project can use 
alternative construction methods to meet the warfighting 
mission requirements while driving lower costs and accelerating 
the project delivery.
    For many of our projects under construction today, NAVFAC 
uses some form of industrialized or modularized construction to 
pre-fabricate facility components at off-site private 
fabrication yards. We see tremendous benefits in this 
technique, and we see it as an opportunity to employ this 
approach. We are working to expand its use and to be able to 
leverage it for far greater economies of scale. We think this 
scale can be achieved by using industrialized construction for 
facilities where we have standard designs and repeatable 
modules that can be grouped in programing and acquisition, then 
constructed at the off-site fabrication plants and brought to 
the project site for final assembly.
    In fact, we are using the other transactional authority 
that Congress provided in 10 U.S.C. section 4022 to pilot 
development of an industrialized construction project that will 
build a child development center in Little Creek, Virginia. We 
then hope to scale that pilot approach to a number of child 
development centers that will be constructed in the Mid-
Atlantic and southwest regions in the next few years.
    NAVFAC is closely following and is keenly interested in 
applying additive construction methods, or 3D printing. We have 
seen tremendous advances in the technology, and we see 
continually improving capabilities and costs that are achieved 
through these methods. NAVFAC is also piloting the use of new 
and improved materials for use in military construction 
projects. We are constructing a Navy child development center 
in Hampton Roads, Virginia that uses cross-laminated timber. At 
Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point we are piloting the use 
of high-performance concretes in a major new F-35 hangar and 
aircraft sustainment center. NAVFAC is working to expand our 
use of various types of composite fiber reinforced polymers, 
particularly for retrofitting and strengthening existing 
structures.
    NAVFAC is working to identify and develop near-term and 
long-term applications exploiting the power of artificial 
intelligence, or AI. We are partnering with the National 
Renewable Energy Lab and National Institutes of Building 
Sciences to identify use cases where AI can be employed in the 
planning, design, and construction to increase efficiency, 
reduce costs, and accelerate project delivery. We are also 
exploring potential efficiency tools with several leading AI 
companies, including early capabilities and generative AI for 
planning and design.
    Finally, in addition to using the section 4022 other 
transactional authority which has shown real value in 
identifying and leveraging industry innovation, NAVFAC is 
exploring the use of alternative delivery methods such as 
progressive design build, lean design build, and construction 
manager at risk. These approaches are being used in the private 
sector to encourage innovation, speed project delivery, and 
reduce cost. However, we are finding that this--that there may 
be statutory or regulatory changes that are needed for us to 
fully leverage these approaches.
    Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am proud 
to be a part of an organization that continuously pushes 
engineering boundaries to provide affordable infrastructure for 
the DoD that helps to ensure the lethality, resiliency, safety, 
and warfighting effectiveness of our military forces.
    I look forward to your questions.
    [The information follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
        
                              ----------                              

                                           Tuesday, March 11, 2025.

                          HYLIION INCORPORATED

                                WITNESS

THOMAS HEALY, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, HYLIION INCORPORATED
    Mr. Carter. Thank you.
    Mr. Healy.
    Mr. Healy. Chairman Carter, Ranking Member Wasserman 
Schultz, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank 
you for having me here today.
    I would like to start off with a question. What if our 
military could produce electricity through a mobile generator 
that provided better electricity than even the U.S. grid? Well, 
I am here today to introduce a new superior power generation 
technology, one that is reliable, efficient, fuel flexible, and 
mobile.
    I founded Hyliion out of my dorm room at Carnegie Mellon, 
and it has been an American startup story. We took the company 
public on the New York Stock Exchange in 2020. We have raised 
over $700 million of capital, and we have begun delivering our 
Karno modular power plant, which we believe will fundamentally 
change how electricity is produced.
    If there are three key things to remember about what we are 
doing, it is first that it is one solution that can be used 
across all applications; second is it offers fuel flexibility, 
reliability, and the performance of military needs; and the 
third is it is manufactured through 3D printing, which enables 
us to make it here in the U.S.
    So let's go back to that first point about one solution 
across all applications. What if military vessels, autonomous 
vessels, what if bases, what if vehicles could all use the same 
power generation solution, leveraging the same parts and the 
same service across all applications?
    The Karno generator is designed to be scalable, as well, 
starting with a 200 kilowatt base unit that then can be stacked 
together to deliver multi megawatts for military bases. That 
base unit, just for reference, is about the size of a bed of a 
pickup truck. So it is extremely compact. This vision is 
already becoming a reality. We actually just delivered our 
first unit to the Navy, and they are going to not only be 
testing it for autonomous vessels, but they are also going to 
be testing it for stationary applications.
    The second point I made was why Karno. So this is a fuel 
agnostic solution. It can operate on over 20 different fuels 
including diesel, natural gas, propane, JP-8. So imagine if our 
troops are deployed somewhere in the world where it is kind of 
unsure of what fuel they are going to have available to them, 
and it is unsure if that fuel is even contaminated. Our 
technology eliminates those concerns because now the system--
you start feeding it fuel, and it will sense what fuel it is 
receiving, adjust accordingly, and deliver electricity.
    Now, reliability is also key. So this system is designed 
with only one moving part, and even that part glides on gas 
bearings. It is similar to, like, an air hockey table. So that 
eliminates the need for oils, eliminates maintenance, or 
substantial maintenance, and eliminates lubricants. So as you 
think about, like, autonomous vessels, where there isn't anyone 
on board to actually maintain the engines, reliability is 
critical.
    Additionally, we want to look at efficiency. So the Karno 
generator, when you compare it to the grid, the grid is about 
36 percent efficient. So, you know, your standard wall outlet. 
The Karno generator will be able to deliver efficiencies up to 
50 percent. That means that we are going to use less fuel to 
make the same amount of power.
    Now, it does all these things while also having a very low 
noise profile. It is similar noise level to, like, an air 
conditioning unit. It also has a low heat profile, meaning the 
system is less detectable. Any one of these advantages alone 
could convince you to move away from diesel generators, but we 
have been able to package all this into one solution, our Karno 
generator.
    So the question comes up of, like, well, why hasn't this 
been done before? That brings me to my third key point, which 
is 3D printing. So if you go back 200 years ago, there were 
steam engines, there were diesel engines, there was this thing 
called a sterling. Engineers always knew that sterlings could 
be or would be the most efficient way of making power, but you 
could never manufacture a sterling. Fast forward to today. 
Thanks to advancements in 3D printing, we are able to make 
parts like this one here that are extremely complex, allow us 
to unlock efficiencies that now make sterlings a reality or, as 
we like to call it, the Karno generator.
    So I think this is going to be passed around.
    So I want to be transparent with where we are in this 
process. As I shared, we just delivered our first unit to the 
Navy, and we have other early adopter customer units planned 
through the middle of this year. We believe the system will 
deliver everything I have shared today, but we are still in the 
final stages of development. We are testing the system and 
continuing to refine it. So as we go forward, we would like to 
expand our relationship with the military, especially as we 
start scaling. We have already set up manufacturing both near 
Austin, Texas as well as in Cincinnati, Ohio. Yes, Austin, and 
so that is going to ensure that this is domestically produced.
    Chairman Carter, Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz, and 
distinguished members of the committee, our military has been 
known for having the best technology, and we need to make sure 
that remains true for power generation, as well. With Hyliion's 
Karno power plant, we are delivering the three key things that 
are important. It is one solution that can be used across all 
applications. It offers fuel flexibility and reliability, as 
well as it is made here in the U.S., thanks to 3D printing. 
Thank you.
    [The information follows:]
   
   [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    
                              ----------                              

                                           Tuesday, March 11, 2025.

                       CENTER FOR NAVAL ANALYSES 

                                WITNESS

BRENT RICHARDSON, PRINCIPAL RESEARCH SCIENTIST OF ENERGY, 
    INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT, CNA
    Mr. Carter. Thank you.
    Mr. Richardson.
    Mr. Richardson. Chairman Carter, Ranking Member Wasserman 
Schultz, distinguished members of the committee, thank you for 
the opportunity to testify on innovative military construction 
techniques.
    CNA's Center for Naval Analyses provides our sailors, our 
Marines, and the broader national security community with 
objective analytics to improve the lethality and effectiveness 
of the joint force. Our sole mission is to support the 
decision-making of military leadership.
    The study we conducted for Deputy Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Infrastructure Modernization and Resilience 
included the identification of barriers to innovative 
construction techniques in MILCON. This study was important 
because the results showed that a forcing function to use such 
techniques should be developed.
    There are several options to bridge the gap between 
industry and DoD efforts to adopt innovative construction 
techniques.
    First, a DoD technology roadmap for MILCON would provide 
necessary guidance for both DoD and service component labs to 
make informed and targeted investments toward innovation. Such 
a roadmap would establish during--enduring capability needs and 
measured focused areas for identified MILCON outcomes. One 
specific use case, for example, is to leverage artificial 
intelligence technology to provide a scalable, fast, and 
reliable aid for design and construction management efforts. A 
published MILCON technology roadmap would also provide a demand 
to--demand signal to industry to drive development of specific 
technologies, potentially leading to private-sector investment. 
This could also foster the subsequent development of industry 
standards and best practices, thereby advancing the further 
adoption of innovative techniques.
    A second recommendation is to adhere to a collaborative, 
front-loaded design process. This would entail the inclusion of 
construction contractors early in the design process for the 
purposes of leveraging additional innovative construction 
knowledge and experience that is newly emerging in the private 
sector. Industry experience shared by a construction contractor 
during the design phase of a project can provide valuable 
benefits to the government, including the identification of 
regionally available innovative techniques, technologies, and 
the supporting workforce.
    Construction contractors with regionally specific expertise 
can also serve as a resource in the identification of potential 
construction challenges in the design phase. This allows the 
designer of record to minimize construction risks and 
facilitate the most efficient construction means and methods. 
NAVFAC, Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command, has 
undergone such efforts and recently published a guide for early 
contractor involvement in the design phase of MILCON projects.
    Lastly, while our analysis highlighted existing DoD efforts 
toward the inclusion of innovative technologies in MILCON such 
as additive manufacturing and mass timber, without a technology 
road map in place and industry engaged in the design phase, DoD 
investment in such technologies is not prioritized, and private 
sector interest is not encouraged.
    Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I look 
forward to your questions.
    [The information follows:]
   
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
   
    
    Mr. Carter. Well, thank you very much, and I will start out 
with the Army.
    Mr. Morrow, these new technologies like 3D printing and 
additive manufacturing hold a promise. Where does the Corps 
stand on the actual use of these and what research do you have 
on the reliability and strength in both cold and hot weather?
    Mr. Morrow. Thank you. Thank you, Congressman, for that 
question.
    So currently, the UFCs allow additive construction or 3D-
printed construction and seismic zones A and in seismic zones B 
with a shake table test to demonstrate that the means and 
methods for that are structurally sound. So in those areas we 
are completely supportive to go into higher seismic zone areas 
or multi-story buildings. I think additional testing is 
required.
    So our ERDC, our research and development center, you know, 
they are working closely with industry. They have continuing 
efforts to demonstrate that material and advance that material. 
But for routine military construction, if for example a design 
build RFP is for a single story building in seismic zone A or 
seismic zone B, there is nothing that would preclude industry 
from proposing on that.
    So recently, the Navy and the Corps developed some joint 
training for our project managers, our technical staff, and our 
acquisition teams. Part of that training was innovative 
construction methods and innovative construction material. So 
we want to, you know, continue that education and ensure that 
out in the field, where the real work is done, you know, our 
team members are cognizant of new emerging technology. When 
they are evaluating proposals and planning projects, you know, 
they are keeping those in mind, as well. Thank you.
    Mr. Carter. Does anyone else want to comment on--I know we 
are all talking about seismic, and that is important, but what 
about the various heat levels we would--now, would it be, what 
you are making, be viable in Alaska or in the Arctic, as well 
as where I live in Texas, where it is hot? That is a good 
question. I would like--as you have talked about what you are 
doing, are you looking into those things? Because I think that 
is very important.
    Mr. Healy. I can maybe share a little bit about that.
    So just going back to your last question of the reliability 
of 3D printing, so that part I shared was made through 3D metal 
additive. Chances are, if you flew to D.C., a greater than 50 
percent chance the plane you were flying on was powered off of 
additive parts. So this has already been approved by the FAA, 
it is being used regularly. So additive is real, it is 
happening, it is being leveraged today.
    In terms of the ability to operate in different 
environments, that part that got passed around is made out of 
cobalt chromium, one of the most resistant metals to heat and 
cold, as well. So our system is designed to be able to operate 
in the extreme cold, like 40 +C, as well as north of 40 +C, 
right? So that means it can go to Alaska, it can go to Texas, 
and actually, one of the unique things is it actually likes the 
cold, it actually performs better in the cold. So we are 
actually looking forward to a Navy deployment that is going to 
be going to Alaska.
    Mr. Carter. Do any of the others want to comment?
    Okay. Navy, do you want to comment? Mr. Hamilton?
    Mr. Hamilton. Thank you, Chairman Carter. I would just add 
to the comments the gentlemen have made that I think, first, 
the additive manufacturing is very highly developed, and we use 
it extensively to manufacture parts. We use it to manufacture 
parts that are no longer obtainable in the market. We use it 
for troop deployments, where we can do things in an 
expeditionary environment. Additive construction is a very 
promising technology, and has developed very substantially over 
the last several years.
    I think, to your question about how does it--how is it 
applied in different temperature zones, I think we know more 
about its application in warm temperature zones. I think 
temperature is certainly dependent on the types of mixtures 
that are being used for the additive construction. That has to 
be carefully monitored and maintained. We have less experience 
with it in cold weather environments. But I think all of those 
environments are important for the future development.
    We believe this is a technology that will have great use as 
we go forward, and especially as we begin to address some of 
the seismic issues that would allow us to apply it in the Indo-
Pacific regions.
    Mr. Carter. Thank you for bringing that up, because it is 
one of the questions I wanted to ask.
    I visited the Indo-Pacific, and so has my colleague, and 
they have got a lot of issues over there. One of them is that 
sea climate, it is very hard on buildings. Do you have any--are 
you building anything in that area where you know how it is 
affected by the ocean, and the constant humidity, and all the 
things they have at Kwajalein, let's say?
    Mr. Hamilton. Yes----
    Mr. Carter. Or Guam.
    Mr. Hamilton. Yes, sir. Thank you for that question.
    We, as you know, have a great deal of work across the 
entirety of the Indo-Pacific theater, and in Guam, as you 
mentioned, we have a very large construction program. We have a 
lot of infrastructure that is aged and damaged that we are 
working to repair and to harden, and we are using a wide 
variety of techniques and approaches to do that.
    We have to be very sensitive to not just seismicity in the 
area. We have to be, of course, very mindful of the typhoon 
conditions that facilities have to endure in those locations. 
We have to, as you pointed out, understand the impact of the 
salt water conditions and other things that they are exposed 
to, and so that limits some types of materials.
    We find that some steel materials, if they are going to be 
used in that area, have to be specially prepared for that kind 
of environment. If they are not--and we have certainly had 
steel components that have deteriorated very quickly in that 
environment.
    We are beginning to look at the use of various reinforced--
fiber-reinforced polymers that can be used in that kind of 
environment. There are some promising developments including 
panelized construction that is very resilient in those kinds of 
environments, and it is also very strong, has the ability to 
put fibers that provide different capabilities within that 
particular panel that is developed so that it might provide RF 
shielding for SCIFs, or it might provide armor or explosive 
resistance for different types of applications. So we find that 
to be a very valuable technique there.
    The other thing that I would mention is that we are looking 
very hard at industrialized construction, the ability to 
prefabricate components in the United States and have those 
shipped to those regions in the Indo-Pacific theater for 
installation on the project sites. We find both cost and timing 
benefits of that application.
    Mr. Carter. On the concrete that they make with the with 
the 3D printing, do you have the--if you are doing that over 
there and on the islands, you got lots of sand. But do you have 
any gravel or any other source to make that concrete viable, or 
will it have to be shipped in there?
    Mr. Hamilton. Yes, sir. We have done testing with the 
additive construction, working with both ERDC and with the 
NAVFAC's Engineering and Expeditionary Warfare Center to see if 
we could use native materials. We did a pilot project in Guam, 
where we used all native materials to do the additive 
construction, and it was very successful. We did blast testing 
with those facilities which were very successful tests. We 
saw--it stood up very well.
    We have also worked with salt water concretes so that for 
expeditionary use--not for long-term permanent facilities, but 
for expeditionary use--our troops can go in and use salt water 
rather than fresh water that would have to be brought in or 
purified on site to make the concrete. We found very similar 
characteristics in terms of strength and durability for a 
short-term, one or two-year construction that we might expect 
in an expeditionary contingency environment.
    Mr. Carter. Thank you.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I have been the ranking member or the chair of the 
subcommittee since 2014, and most of that time I was serving 
alongside Judge Carter. I think, if he and I had a nickel for 
every reprograming that we have signed in our roles due to 
increased construction costs, increased labor costs that were 
unanticipated by the military, we could retire.
    President Trump has announced a 25 percent import tax on 
steel and aluminum, in addition to a broad range of other 
tariffs against countries like Canada, Mexico, and China. 
During this hearing he announced an additional 25 percent 
tariff on aluminum and steel against Canada. These countries 
are retaliating. They are levying tariffs in response, and 
boycotts. Among the wide range of negative inflationary effects 
these unnecessary actions will have on our economy, they will 
undoubtedly lead to our needing to sign more reprograming 
requests due to increased unanticipated costs.
    So I would like to hear from each of you what impact you 
expect to see on material and construction costs as a result of 
the newly-announced tariffs on products like steel, aluminum, 
including the potential impacts on labor costs which American 
companies rely upon.
    Mr. Morrow, you can start.
    Mr. Morrow. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    I think the first point I would like to make is we have put 
a tremendous amount of emphasis on our project planning process 
and reducing the risk and getting all of the information 
possible for the site exactly to minimize any future 
reprograming.
    So many of the efforts to do--advance a project to a 35 
percent design, get a better cost estimate, et cetera is 
already starting to pay dividends. So hopefully, we will have 
fewer reprograming based on unanticipated costs. I think it is 
really too early to tell how the market is going to respond to 
many changes. One of the shortcomings of cost engineering is we 
have lots of historical data, but, you know, we can't, you 
know, look precisely into the future.
    So our cost engineers, you know, follow the markets very 
carefully, try to incorporate all of the risk-informed 
decision-making they can into developing those estimates, but I 
think it is really too early to tell----
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Mr. Morrow, are you really telling 
me that an unanticipated 50 percent tariff on aluminum and 
steel is not going to--you are not sure whether that would 
cause unanticipated increases in costs to military construction 
projects?
    Mr. Morrow. It depends, of course, project by project, 
where--you know, obviously, we follow the Buy America Act, and 
most of our material comes from this country. We are talking 
about other technologies like mass timber that could replace 
steel or concrete structures.
    Every project is individual, and----
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Right.
    Mr. Morrow [continuing]. I think the most----
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Okay.
    Mr. Morrow [continuing]. Important thing we can do is to 
try to get the number right in the first place, so that 
everybody has decision space to make the appropriate----
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Unfortunately, all of what you are 
saying is true, and yet we still regularly have to--are 
presented with reprogrammings that are the result of 
unanticipated costs. So the system you are describing is not 
working, is not improving. So it is not working, is not 
improving, and it is just hard for me to believe that you are--
I know you are being truthful, but it is hard for me to buy 
that you are not sure whether 50 percent tariffs on aluminum 
and steel are not going to result in increased costs.
    Mr. Hamilton.
    Mr. Hamilton. Thank you, Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz, 
for the question.
    I think the--you know, I certainly acknowledge the 
challenge that you highlighted with cost estimating, and 
especially in dynamic changing times in the markets. We have 
done a number of things to try to address those challenges. As 
Mr. Morrow identified, we have put a focus on better 
understanding market conditions and being able to predict them 
and incorporate them into our cost estimating processes. We 
have a chief economist that tracks all those economic trends 
and builds them into our building cost indexes that we apply to 
our projects. We have advanced our development of cost schedule 
risk analysis, are working to mature designs.
    I think the innovations that we are talking about today in 
terms of materials and alternative construction methods is 
something that helps us deal with some of the specific market 
turns, whether it might be concrete, or it might be steel, or 
various construction materials that have perturbations in cost. 
We now have more alternatives to be able to use cross-laminated 
timbers, or to be able to use tension fabric structures, or 
printed concrete materials and other things that help us----
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. But those are----
    Mr. Hamilton [continuing]. Avoid----
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. There is only two pilot projects per 
service on materials like that, so there is certainly not 
widespread use of those alternative materials. We are talking 
about the immediate impact of a 50 percent tariff on the 
materials that we are currently using.
    So what you are describing, certainly in the long term, 
when we move away from these kinds of materials, but it is hard 
to wrap my mind around the idea that--I realize it is--no one 
wants to say what it is. The real answer is because we all know 
what it is. It is pretty obvious.
    Mr. Richardson.
    Mr. Richardson. Thank you, Wasserman Schultz, for the 
question.
    I was prepared to talk about barriers, potential barriers 
to including more innovative construction techniques in 
military construction. I would--so we didn't examine specific 
technologies, so I would say that these increased tariffs could 
potentially force us to be more innovative in employing 
constructive methods that could be used in the United States.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Which would result in job losses 
because if we are shifting away from the industries that we 
typically use materials from because they are too expensive, 
then obviously people will lose their jobs.
    Mr. Chairman, I have just one other question.
    From my home state of Florida to the far shores of Guam, 
our military installations face a greater threat than ever 
before from extreme weather events that are impacted--driven by 
climate change. Military construction, obviously, we have 
realized has to take into the account the danger of wildfires, 
hurricanes, severe storms, more depending on the location of 
projects. We have to increase our investments in resiliency 
now, because even if building resiliency into these projects is 
costly, we know doing nothing results in far greater costs to 
rebuild damaged and destroyed infrastructure.
    So Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Morrow, what steps are you taking 
to ensure that all military construction projects prioritize 
resiliency?
    How might alternative materials, like the ones mentioned 
today, play a role in improving the resiliency of our 
infrastructure?
    Mr. Hamilton. Thank you, Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz, 
for the question.
    I think there are many things we can do and are doing to 
address this. I think it starts with understanding where we 
need to have different kinds of materials to withstand the 
kinds of environments that we are witnessing today, and some of 
the materials we are talking about today are specifically 
designed to deal with those harsh environments.
    We are making sure that we are focused on updating our 
unified facilities criteria and guide specifications that 
incorporate those kinds of materials into the projects that we 
design. We are making sure that we harden areas, for example, 
as we try to recover from the Typhoon Mawar in Guam to harden 
the utility systems, to make them more resilient, more able to 
withstand the kinds of weather impacts that we have been 
experiencing, and make sure that we are prepared, we have 
redundancy in our systems where that is necessary to be able to 
continue military operations and the--in the face of those 
kinds of events.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you.
    Mr. Morrow. Just, Congresswoman, two points.
    One, I would use Tyndall Air Force Base as an example. 
Obviously, that installation was devastated following a 
hurricane many years ago. There has been a tremendous amount of 
construction there, and that those new facilities have fared 
very well in subsequent storms. So I do think we are learning 
lessons and we are continually improving.
    Another strength that the Corps of Engineers has is our 
civil works mission. So we do a lot of coastal storm damage 
reduction projects, other projects of that nature. So when 
there are coastal installations, we have got that technology 
and that, you know, subject matter expert base to lean on. If 
it is a Navy or an Air Force project, you know, we work 
collaboratively all the time to make sure we are putting the 
right professionals to address those types of issues.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know you and I have seen the 
impact of the salt water erosion and intrusion in the Pacific 
and in Florida. We have MacDill and Tyndall that are, you know, 
right on the water and are regularly exposed to the risks. So 
we need to make sure we are continuing to focus on resiliency. 
Thank you.
    Mr. Carter. Mr. Rutherford.
    Mr. Rutherford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to 
all of our witnesses today, and I will ask you to give me a 
little grace on my voice, as well.
    But I want to go back to the supply chain issue for a 
moment, because I think it is very important not just in light 
of tariffs, but after COVID-19 we saw how fragile all of our 
supply chains are. One of the things that we have done--I would 
like to ask you, Mr. Hamilton--one of the things that we have 
done in HUD is on some programing we have allowed them a two-
year appropriation, and that--the response has been very 
positive. Can you talk about how--well, a couple of things. How 
would that help with your supply chain issues with cross-
laminated timber, for example?
    I know they did a project up in Joint Base Lewis-McChord. I 
think Mr. Richardson talked about that. Can you talk a little 
bit about what that might mean to cost and development?
    Mr. Hamilton. Yes, sir. Thank you, Congressman Rutherford, 
for the question.
    We do struggle today as our construction projects are more 
and more costly, especially with our O&M appropriations, which 
are one-year appropriations. Today the average cost of our 
large, O&M-funded projects are larger than the military 
construction projects we funded not that many years ago.
    As we look at those projects, we also find that both for 
military construction and O&M-funded projects we have many 
specific components and equipment, sometimes materials that are 
long lead, sometimes a year-and-a-half, two, three years for 
substations and electrical switchgear and other things. So the 
ability to have that equipment purchased in advance so that it 
is available when the construction project needs it is really 
important to allow the project to be able to finish in a timely 
manner.
    The length of appropriations is challenging because, as you 
execute a very large, O&M-funded appropriation--appropriated 
project with a--with the expiration of the funds, you are both 
squeezing it on the front end and often challenged to have a 
large number of those projects all going out to competition at 
the same time in the latter part of the fiscal year, and then 
you are executing it after the appropriation has expired.
    So especially on those repair projects, you encounter 
unforeseen conditions, and those conditions--there is no longer 
a current appropriation to fund those changes so you have to 
reach back to previous appropriations, often delaying the 
project, raising the cost of delivery. So multi-year O&M 
appropriations would be very helpful to alleviate that issue.
    Mr. Rutherford. It has worked very well in HUD, Mr. 
Chairman. That is something we may want to look at also.
    Mr. Healy, I am really--thank you, Mr. Hamilton--I am 
really intrigued by your development. One of the things that I 
am really concerned about for America's defense is, you know, 
these electromagnetic pulses. Is your generator protected from 
those EMPs, or can it be?
    Mr. Healy. Yes, thank you, Congressman. Today it is not 
protected from EMP attacks. But what I will share is through 
our journey we have been working with the Navy, and the Navy 
has continued to give us military specs that we need to be able 
to meet, and then our engineering team goes and achieves those.
    A perfect example is Navy is going to run on diesel fuel. 
They wanted to be able to run on up to 20 percent contaminated 
with salt water diesel fuel. So then we go and we engineer the 
system to be able to do that. So that is something if, you 
know, the military is interested in, we would be happy to 
explore.
    Mr. Rutherford. That is pretty amazing, actually. I would 
like to ask Mr. Morrow.
    The--in the 2025 NDAA we allowed--I forget the section. 
Let's see. We allow you to now use O&M instead of MILCON for 
budgeting for some of the beach erosion, other types of erosion 
at our military facilities like Blount Island Command in 
Jacksonville, where we have got some erosion on the island. Is 
the Navy planning on using that moving forward? Are we--is that 
all you need to start using O&M?
    Mr. Morrow. So any time we have more flexibility on the 
types of projects we can fund, whether MILCON or O&M, it makes 
us more responsive and more flexible.
    I am not familiar if we have--so when the Corps executes 
O&M, whether on behalf of the Army or the Navy, they do it on a 
reimbursable basis, and our organization is funded by those 
projects.
    So we have had a number of recent changes to the O&M rules 
that have all been very, very helpful. So the most recent is in 
barracks, so we can now repair a barracks through a replacement 
of a new facility. That is a pilot initiative that----
    Mr. Rutherford. Okay, I--Mr. Morrow, I hate to cut you off, 
but I see my time has expired. But I will tell you I found it 
at section 2847. So if we could look at moving those projects 
forward, especially at Blount Island Command, thank you.
    Mr. Morrow. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Rutherford. I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. Oh, man, I am losing my voice.
    Mr. Bishop.
    Mr. Bishop. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and let me 
thank the witnesses for their testimony this morning. Let me 
start with Mr. Morrow.
    As you know, Georgia has the largest stand of privately-
owned timber land in the nation, and we are proud of our 
efforts to be good stewards of the land and produce 
environmentally-friendly materials that directly contribute to 
sequestering greenhouse gases. In the advent of mass timber, 
the building material made from multiple layers of wood that 
you have described is amazing, it is an innovation, high 
quality, low cost, efficient, environmentally-friendly building 
construction. You are now able to build much larger and taller 
structures with this engineered wood.
    In 2023 the Corps announced a new policy of considering at 
least one option where mass timber is a substantial structural 
component when comparing structural systems during the early 
design of vertical construction projects. Can you give an 
update of the new policy, and if you have seen an increase in 
the usage of mass timber in construction projects?
    Do you have any suggestions on how we can reduce the 
remaining barriers to the adoption of mass timber in military 
construction projects?
    Mr. Morrow. Thank you, Congressman. So a quick update.
    We are at a 100 percent design for a mass timber barracks 
at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, and so that is an fiscal year 2025 
MILCON project. So if we have an appropriations bill to execute 
that work, you know, we are poised to do that right now.
    But you are absolutely right. Over the last few years there 
is much more code-compliant mass-timber cross-laminated timber 
capability. So we are encouraging all of our--you know, 
designers and on our design build construction contractors to 
bring to the table, you know, any innovative technology that is 
both code-compliant and meets the mission.
    As commodity prices change, as, you know, the economic 
circumstances on the ground change, you know, that is when 
industry--we want to give them the most flexibility to bring 
the best ideas to the table, you know, to safely deliver 
quality projects on time and on budget.
    So we really rely on our industry partners, you know, to be 
as innovative as possible.
    Mr. Bishop. You mentioned if we get an appropriations bill. 
With the majority pushing for full-year continuing resolution, 
I am very concerned that the lack of certainty and direction 
from Congress may severely hamper our armed services. So I 
would like to hear from you how this would affect MILCON 
projects that are currently in projects--in progress or those 
that are rejected for 2025 completion. Would a full-year CR 
delay future projects?
    So we have two in Georgia for fiscal year 2029. Would those 
be pushed back?
    Mr. Morrow. So if we weren't allowed new starts? My 
understanding is the current bill under consideration does 
allow new starts for military construction. But until it is 
passed, we won't know.
    Mr. Bishop. Okay, one other follow-up. The NDAA for fiscal 
year 2019 required the Department of Defense to stop purchasing 
PFAS by October of 2023, and to stop using them completely by 
October of 2025. What advancements has the Corps of Engineers 
made in this area as the deadline is quickly approaching? Or 
what testing is being completed on new materials so we won't 
find ourselves in the same situation years down the road 
battling hazardous materials?
    Mr. Morrow. Yes, sir. So we have been prohibited from using 
PFAS or PFAS-containing materials primarily in AFFF or aqueous 
firefighting foam since 2016. However, our legacy systems, we 
need to decommission them, upgrade them to new systems, and we 
have been--you know, we are on a path to do that.
    The final set of contracts to execute all of that 
recommissioning and upgrading those AFFF systems are ready for 
contract award this year. Current price tag, our estimate, is 
about $56 million. It has not yet been funded, but we are ready 
to execute as soon as funding is made available.
    Again, you know, the Corps executes these projects on a 
reimbursable basis for the installation management command.
    Mr. Bishop. Thank you.
    Mr. Hamilton, can you tell us what you have been seeing 
with regard to the use of mass timber with the Navy?
    Mr. Hamilton. Yes, sir, thank you for the question.
    We also are doing a pilot project with cross-laminated 
timbers. Ours is a child development center in the Hampton 
Roads, Virginia area. That project is in design and will soon 
transition to construction.
    We have found a lot of advantages to the cross-laminated 
timber. It is lighter than steel or concrete. It has resiliency 
features. It is actually very--compared to other wood 
components, very good in fire and even blast resistance. But 
one of the big advantages we found with it is it can be 
manufactured in a manufacturing environment which is very 
precise, cut with digital equipment and brought to the site in 
very precise component shapes and sizes and installed there, 
often saving time of in-field construction.
    So we see this as an opportunity for future use in a number 
of different ways and, as you mentioned, now available to be 
used for higher--taller buildings than we had approved it for 
in the past.
    Mr. Bishop. Well, thank you very much. I think my time has 
expired.
    Mr. Carter. Ms. Bice.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the 
witnesses for being here with us this morning.
    Let me first start out by saying that I am proud to 
represent the Oklahoma City metro area, which is home to Tinker 
Air Force Base. Tinker has made use of some innovative 
technologies like augmented reality to smartly design military 
construction projects like the Bomber Agile Common Hangar. 
Augmented reality has allowed Tinker to identify some 
unforeseen site conditions well ahead of time, which will 
reduce the cost and streamline project timelines.
    Additionally, Tinker's Bomber Agile Hangar has the 
potential of reducing costs from not having to rebuild 
facilities and projects as often, thereby increasing the 
lifespan of these facilities. So I think that these innovative 
technologies have some incredible use, and I am glad that--to 
hear today that we are using some of them.
    One of the questions I have--and it is probably more for 
Mr. Healy and Mr. Richardson--is can you talk a little bit 
about the challenges that you face with actually getting into, 
you know, the DoD and utilizing these new innovative 
technologies? The process for engagement, is it challenging for 
you all to actually enter the marketplace to be able to sell 
your product?
    Mr. Healy. We were fortunate that our relationship with the 
Navy actually began when this technology was still within GE. 
Obviously, GE has a massive relationship with the military, and 
then that contract moved over, and then we have subsequently 
been able to win additional contracts with the Navy going 
forward.
    What we have found, if we are doing it the organic path, 
the SBIR is the best place to start. But I do agree with your 
comment of, as a start-up company, it is not necessarily easy 
to navigate the military.
    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Richardson, would you like to add anything 
there?
    Mr. Richardson. Yes. So the study we did for DASD, 
examining barriers to the inclusion of innovative construction 
techniques in MILCON, showed that perhaps the establishment of 
goals and metrics could facilitate the use of more of these 
materials. For example, like identifying a specific technology 
and setting what--and establishing what percentage of MILCON 
projects would include said technology would be a way to 
overcome that barrier.
    Mrs. Bice. Perfect, thank you.
    Shifting to Mr. Morrow and Mr. Hamilton, in your experience 
have you seen regulations with green initiatives on military 
bases--to include mandating certain environmental standards--
drive up the cost of MILCON projects?
    Mr. Morrow. So it was referenced earlier, MILCON cost 
premium study. So when we evaluate the cost of MILCON, we kind 
of sort them into these are legal reasons why military 
construction is sometimes more expensive, these are regulatory 
issues, and these are policy issues. Often times with respect 
to those environmental issues, it is the first cost versus the 
life cycle cost, you know, and that analysis. So it certainly 
can drive first costs up, hopefully drive life cycle costs 
down. But that--you know, those policy issues definitely are a 
contributor to that MILCON----
    Mrs. Bice. There is no guarantee, though, that those life 
cycle costs will go down. This is sort of an assumption or a 
conjecture based on information you have today, correct?
    Mr. Morrow. Yes, and any of those policies there is a 
waiver process, and many of them are changing right now. But 
yes.
    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Hamilton, would you like to----
    Mr. Hamilton. I agree with what Mr. Morrow said. I think 
that we often, as we look at the use of our facilities, the 
length and the variety of missions that a given military 
facility will experience over the life of the facility are very 
different than what is experienced in private sector. So the 
life cycle cost becomes really much more important than the 
initial cost.
    Sometimes those investments that are driving costs up--and 
many of them do have statutory or policy drivers, but many of 
them do have reasons that pay off over the life cycle of that 
facility, and so we try to look at those two different 
components and balance, you know, the needs of the military for 
a given project.
    Mrs. Bice. Would it be more helpful if you had flexibility, 
though, to make those decisions without the mandates or policy 
directives that are included?
    Mr. Hamilton. Yes, ma'am. Flexibility is always valuable.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you. Lastly, Mr. Hamilton, in your opening 
remarks you mentioned some statutory requirements that do need 
to change to allow more flexibility in the use of OTAs. Can you 
talk a little bit more about that?
    Mr. Hamilton. Yes, Congresswoman, thanks for the question.
    I think this is an area that we are really looking hard at 
because, as Mr. Morrow said, we rely on industry to bring 
innovative techniques, constructions, materials to our 
projects. As you highlight, industry members are often hesitant 
to do that because there is risk in proposing those new 
technologies, there is risk in not being selected. We are 
trying to make our request for proposals have selection 
criteria that favor innovative solutions that drive down costs 
and speed delivery.
    But there is still a familiarity because usually that 
partner is coming in not as a general contractor, they are 
coming in as a subcontractor or a vendor, and so they have to 
form that relationship. The general contractor has to be 
familiar with that technology and feel comfortable in 
overseeing that in the project that they are responsible for, 
and that sometimes takes time. So I think things that partner 
that relationship help facilitate innovation.
    The other point that I think is really important that I 
would make is that our current contracting requirements--some 
statutory, some regulatory--make it very difficult for us to 
bring constructors in early to partner with designers to walk 
through those means and methods and alternatives, and go 
through the use cases that might drive down costs and speed. So 
additional flexibilities that allow us to award a construction-
type contract partnered with the designer early in the process 
would be helpful to bring innovation to projects.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, I think it would be great for Mr. Hamilton to 
maybe give us some additional examples of how that could be 
utilized and what policy directives we may be able to implement 
to help achieve those long-term goals. So with that, Mr. 
Chairman, I yield.
    Mr. Carter. Ms. Escobar, five minutes.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, Madam Ranking 
Member. I am thrilled to be on the Appropriations Committee and 
on this subcommittee.
    To our witnesses, thank you all so much for sharing all of 
this great information with us.
    I get to represent Fort Bliss. It is a premier 
installation, and the 3D barracks that were printed on Fort 
Bliss are really exceptional, and I was proud to be on site for 
different components of the project. I would like to invite any 
of my fellow committee members who would like to come and see 
them to join me at Fort Bliss so you can take a look firsthand 
at the quality of the work.
    We are all wanting to find as much efficiency and savings 
as possible. I have been so alarmed and concerned about the way 
that it is being done right now by the President and his buddy, 
Elon Musk, with the mass firings of watchdogs and people with 
key important experience. I think that costs us money in the 
long term, it doesn't save us money. But the conversations 
happening in this committee right now are what could actually 
save us money if we take the information that we learn here and 
actually put it into action.
    We have data from our district, from Fort Bliss, about the 
MILCON projects there, and they are one example of where this 
subcommittee really could find some key savings. Many of the 
military construction projects--and this is true across the 
country--end up costing anywhere--in El Paso our data shows 
from 68 percent more than what is happening locally to 500 
times more than what is happening locally when we compare 
housing built at our local university--same square footage, you 
know, kind of same parameters--to barracks construction. The 
cost differential is shocking.
    So there are huge opportunities for us to change things up, 
and you all have given us some good examples. I think among 
those opportunities we can require comparative market analysis 
for all facilities improvement plan projects. We could empower 
a privatized housing partner to build barracks, as an example. 
We could establish major construction inter-governmental 
service agreements with local governments as an example. But 3D 
printing is another critical example.
    So Mr. Morrow, I would love to dive in a little bit on this 
with you. What are--what kind--or actually, you know what? I am 
going to skip to the second question that I was planning on 
asking you. But what latitude do you think installation 
commanders need in order to utilize more 3D printing for things 
like barracks or for other construction projects?
    When I was on site after the ribbon cutting, I asked the 
folks there--same question. What were the impediments? What 
were--what are the areas of opportunity where we can expedite 
this more? What do we need to do in order to make more projects 
like this successful and possible?
    Mr. Morrow. Thank you, Congresswoman. That is a great 
question.
    So our installation commanders and our garrisons are the 
requirements generators for all of the MILCON projects that 
eventually come to the Corps of Engineers or to NAVFAC for 
execution. So it really starts with, you know, what are their 
requirements on site, and if they can shape those to be 
conducive for innovative technologies. So a lot of it has to do 
with, you know, multi-story construction is going to be more 
problematic. You know, mass timber has its limitations on how 
large a building. But there is nothing that prevents them from, 
you know, creating a campus environment or something slightly 
different.
    So again, you know, what we encourage people to do is be, 
you know, as performance-oriented in developing those 
requirements as possible, and not as prescriptive. When you do 
that, then it opens up opportunities for new ideas, innovative 
technology, et cetera.
    I did just recently meet with our construction field team 
out of the Fort Worth district, a tremendous set of exemplary 
professionals. So thank you for those kind words.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you.
    I am out of time, but I think it would be important at some 
point to hear from all of you what are the barriers to making 
sure we move on this opportunity quickly so that we can focus 
on eliminating those barriers.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. Mr. Franklin.
    Mr. Franklin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you, gentlemen, for being here with us this morning, 
a very fascinating topic to me, and there is also some transfer 
over with the Corps to the Energy and Water Subcommittee I sit 
on.
    Mr. Hamilton, Ms. Bice stole the question I was going to 
ask you, because I know in your testimony you talked about 
statutory changes needed. I would love to follow up with you 
further on some of those, but I know, Mr. Morrow, it looked 
like you were chomping at the bit to hop in there, too, from 
the Corps' perspective. What are some statutory changes we can 
do to assist you with this process?
    Mr. Morrow. So Mr. Hamilton referred to getting 
construction contractors involved early in the process, and we 
can do that within Federal acquisition regulations, but 
sometimes we have to really contort ourselves to make that. So 
we have ECI contracts and what we refer to as IDAC contracts, 
integrated design and construction contracts. But it does 
require a lot of extra contract administration and extra hoops 
to jump through.
    So other transactional authorities, we have a MILCON 
construction pilot for all the services for OTAs. Again, it 
goes back to that comment the more flexibility we have, just 
like when we don't--if we tell a contractor exactly what we 
want, we are going to get what we ask for. If we tell them the 
requirements that we need, then we get those new ideas.
    The same is true on the acquisition side for NAVFAC and 
USACE. You know, the more decision space we have and 
flexibility, the more innovative we can be in bringing those to 
bear.
    So I would say right now we can't really do progressive 
design-bid-build, which is a common delivery method in 
industry, within the constraints that we have, other than 
through an OTA. So that would be an example.
    Mr. Franklin. Okay. I look forward to following up with 
both of you and working with staff. So if we can--there are 
specific things we can do to assist in that process, then we 
need to do it.
    Let's see, Mr. Richardson, you talked about DoD needing a 
road map. Can you talk a little bit more about that? What--how 
can we assist in that, and what would that look like?
    Mr. Richardson. Thank you, Congressman, for that question.
    So the road map that we envisioned would look like the 
National Defense Science and Technology Strategy. So that 
strategy identifies critical technologies for national defense. 
So--and commercial, actually, leads--commercial industry leads 
the way in the development of those technologies. Those 
technologies are shared. That is--the strategy is--you can look 
it up on the internet. Because those are shared and available, 
we see academia, we see the Department of Defense, and we see 
industry innovating in that space.
    So something similar to that but for MILCON, which would 
include the identification of technologies that would be 
critical to improving MILCON performance, would be what I 
recommend.
    Mr. Franklin. Okay, great. We look forward to working with 
you on something like that, as well.
    Mr. Healy, thank you for your presentation. I was not 
familiar with what you are doing, and I would love to learn 
more. I would love to get a deeper dive on it. It sounds like 
you have figured out the better and the faster at scale. Will 
this be cheaper? It seems like it would be, just with all the 
problems it solves.
    Mr. Healy. So we expect that upfront costs will be more 
than a conventional diesel generator. But then it really comes 
down to what is your ROI, what is your payback? There are three 
key--or two key advantages that we are offering.
    So one is that improved efficiency, which means you are 
just going to use less fuel, which is--the majority of cost of 
operating a generator is the fuel that goes into it.
    Then the second is the lower maintenance. So we are finding 
that--it depends on the industry. Actually, in military 
applications, where fuel is very expensive in some instances, 
it is going to mean you are going to have a faster payback. But 
in normal industries we are seeing it is in a few years that 
you actually break over and it is a positive return on your 
investment.
    Mr. Franklin. Do you feel that government contracting is 
set up to allow for the long-range horizon view, or is it just 
an up cost--whoever is cheapest to produce gets it?
    I mean, do you feel that we factor ROI into--as we evaluate 
different options?
    Mr. Healy. I am probably not the best to comment on it at 
this stage, just because of where we are, where--we just have 
moved into the commercialization phase of things. Up to now it 
has been more of the development phase working with the Navy.
    But one thing to share is additive manufacturing, 3D 
printing, it is new, right? If the military is going to demand 
volume of these type of solutions, that means the suppliers 
need to go out and procure 3D printers, set those up, and that 
process can take over a year to do. So any vision or any kind 
of visibility into the horizon of demand and volumes is 
extremely helpful because this isn't just hire contractors to 
go build it. This is go buy new machines, new equipment that 
will be better at manufacturing.
    Mr. Franklin. Okay. Karno likes cold, so how about the moon 
or Mars?
    Mr. Healy. Yes. So outer space is something that is on 
theoretical. We think it can be done, but time will tell. We 
got to get things deployed here in the U.S. first.
    Mr. Franklin. Roger, thanks.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. Mr. Levin.
    Mr. Levin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am truly honored and 
excited to be on this subcommittee, and I have the great honor 
and responsibility to represent Marine Corps Base Camp 
Pendleton in beautiful southern California.
    Just a couple of weeks ago I toured some of our barracks, 
and they need help. So I am very excited to be on this 
subcommittee, in part to see what we can do about the barracks 
there on base. We have got about 125 of them, and about half 
either need to be completely torn down or thoroughly 
rehabilitated.
    The Marines that run the base, they talk about the barracks 
as operational necessity. No longer do they use the term 
``quality of life.'' It is operational necessity. It is about 
readiness. A lot of these junior enlisted Marines and sailors 
are living in sub-par conditions. You have got, you know, HVAC 
systems that don't work. You have got mold. You know, I toured 
one building where Marines had been living as recently as just 
a few months before, and it is just unacceptable that we would 
continue to have barracks in that shape. Towards that end, I am 
very interested in getting this fixed, and if 3D printing 
provides a way to do it maybe faster and cheaper, that is of 
interest to me.
    But I wanted to ask--and maybe, Mr. Richardson, I will 
start with you, because you had some of this in your 
testimony--at Camp Pendleton we have got multi-level barracks, 
you know, bigger buildings. I was talking to my colleague and 
friend, Ms. Escobar, about the Fort Bliss barracks. Has there 
been any testing of larger barracks, larger facilities?
    Can you tell me anything about higher initial costs, size 
constraints?
    Obviously, in California we have these things called 
earthquakes that we are always concerned about, and then maybe 
whatever additional regulatory approval would be needed to do 
something like that.
    Mr. Richardson. Thank you for the question, Congressman.
    We did not, as part of the study I mentioned, examine any 
specific technologies. But what I can tell you--and I know Mr. 
Hamilton or Mr. Morrow can comment on----
    Mr. Levin. Yes.
    Mr. Richardson. If you are talking about building multi-
story facilities, you are going to be limited into what 
innovative techniques or materials that you can use. For 
example, I believe that concrete printing is limited to one 
story.
    Mr. Levin. One story.
    Mr. Richardson. One story now. However, a laminated timber 
is not.
    Mr. Levin. Anybody else want to comment on this? Thank you.
    Mr. Morrow. I would just say that the current requirement 
is single story seismic zones A and B, so potentially 
problematic. But more testing could result in increased seismic 
zone areas or multi-story building. For the Corps of Engineers, 
that testing is done out of our construction lab in Champaign, 
Illinois, and I--those people are amazing, and I would invite 
anyone on the subcommittee who would like a tour or to visit 
the facility, they would love to have you.
    Mr. Levin. Can you reinforce the 3D-printed concrete with 
steel, as you would in a normal building?
    Mr. Morrow. It is reinforced with steel.
    Mr. Levin. What are the--so the constraints on multi-story 
are what?
    Mr. Morrow. They are lack of testing.
    Mr. Levin. Lack of testing. But that is going on right now 
in Champaign?
    Mr. Morrow. That is the source where the Corps of Engineers 
does all its construction testing. However, you know, unless we 
have funding and a requirement--you know, so they are working 
with industry----
    Mr. Levin. Yes.
    Mr. Morrow [continuing]. Every day, but we have to have a 
requirement to work against----
    Mr. Levin. Go ahead. No, you are eager to get in.
    Mr. Hamilton. I was just going to say, sir, that I think 
today the gantry crane printers are generally limited to one 
story, but there is a new printer technology that is--that has 
been developed and is in testing right now that is more of a 
single arm that can print up to 27 feet tall. That will allow 
us to get up to a second story, would allow you to print roofs. 
They are testing that technology today. I think, as that gets 
tested and we have analysis of the seismic resiliency of it, 
that is a new--that will open up new doors to much bigger use.
    Mr. Levin. The folks there on base tell me that if they 
were to redo the--roughly half of the buildings, we are talking 
about well over $1 billion. The Barracks 2030 Initiative says 
everything has to be redone by 2043. Any thought on the initial 
start-up cost for the 3D printing alternative, and then also 
when you think it might be commercially available?
    Mr. Hamilton. If I could, sir, I think--I am very familiar 
with Camp Pendleton. I rebuilt a lot of the barracks there, 
sort of the last generation----
    Mr. Levin. So you get it.
    Mr. Hamilton [continuing]. Built the hospital there. So I 
appreciate your comments about it.
    Mr. Levin. You did a great job with that.
    Mr. Hamilton. I think, in addition to 3D printing, 
industrialized construction is very well suited to the Marine 
Corps barracks program. It is an opportunity to have standard 
designs, to build modules that you can have fabricated in a 
manufacturing environment where you have the workforce, you 
have all the industrialized computerized machinery, and you 
send those modules out to be installed on the site. A general 
contractor puts in the site work, the slabs, and really 
assembles the modules.
    I think when you look at the long-duration barracks program 
that the Marine Corps is talking about, really recapitalizing 
their entire barracks infrastructure----
    Mr. Levin. Yes.
    Mr. Hamilton [continuing]. That is ideally suited for that 
kind of event.
    There are things we need to do to help that industrialized 
manufacturing or construction capability in the United States 
take off and take hold.
    Mr. Levin. So we are out of time. I don't want to run long 
on my very first hearing, but I look forward to further 
conversation with you. We will take that back.
    I will yield back.
    Mr. Carter. Mr. LaLota.
    Mr. LaLota. Thank you, Chairman. I have to admit I come to 
this first hearing with a little bit of bias on this Military 
Construction and VA subcommittee. My bias is informed by my 
years I spent in the Navy. I deployed to the western Pacific in 
2001, 2003, and 2005, and just a few months ago I was able to 
visit some of the bases 20 years later that I was deployed to, 
and was left with a little less energy seeing some of the 
infrastructure there had been left abandoned, dilapidated, and 
is in dire need of our support here. I appreciate the witnesses 
and your expertise and your experience in helping to inform us 
here on this subcommittee panel on how we in Congress and our 
services can do a better job raising our standards. Some of the 
facilities I visited have those dilapidated structures, 
specifically in Japan, a number of them, and those dilapidated 
structures detract from their operational value, and they are 
outright dangerous and unusable.
    Rightfully so, the Indo-Pacific Command is a large focus of 
our Department of Defense. They are anticipating and deterring 
threats from the CCP, Russia, and North Korea. Mr. Hamilton, 
given your expertise as one of the Navy's top engineers, how 
can our military, with Congress's support and the Navy 
specifically, be more agile in terms of acquisition and 
adoption of novel construction technologies, especially in that 
very important Indo-Pacific Command?
    Mr. Hamilton. Congressman, thanks very much for the 
question.
    I also was stationed in Korea and in Guam, and deployed 
into the Pacific theater, and so I am very familiar with the 
challenges that they face there.
    I do think that we need to have a long-term capital plan to 
modernize those facilities. As you said, many of them are far 
beyond their useful life, and we need to be providing 
facilities that can replace those and take the modern weapon 
systems, the modern missions that are expected to be deployed 
in those areas.
    I think, contractually, I do believe that the 
industrialized construction technique that I talked about 
earlier is one that is very applicable to overseas, especially 
in the Indo-Pacific theater, where we could fabricate many of 
the components or modules in the states and have them shipped 
for installation. I think it gives us the ability to be very 
agile so that those can be configured in different ways to meet 
different missions, and we can be very responsive to the 
military commanders' needs and where the priorities are as they 
change over time.
    Mr. LaLota. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Richardson, I--we were chatting before. You graduated 
three years after the best Naval Academy class that has ever 
been. I appreciate that and your service in the Navy Civil 
Engineer Corps. Can you add some perspectives to how the Navy, 
the military--specifically with Congress's support--can help 
improve more--get more projects done on time, within the right 
quality, and the right cost?
    Mr. Richardson. Thank you for that question and comment, 
Mr. Congressman.
    So yes, there are certainly innovative technologies that 
could improve performance. I wish I was able to explore more of 
these technologies in our study. But going back to some of my 
earlier comments, establishing or identifying some of those 
technologies that could assist in perhaps better construction 
performance would be of value.
    Mr. LaLota. Thanks.
    Mr. Morrow, I only have about a minute left, but with my 
remaining time a similar question: Where can Congress help our 
services knock down some of the bureaucratic red tape, or 
otherwise expedite the military construction as it relates to 
delivering projects that are at the right cost, at the right 
time, and the right quality, sir?
    Mr. Morrow. Thank you for that question.
    So what we are doing right now is trying to identify what--
why MILCON costs more than private sector, and really produce 
as factual a document as possible: Here are the laws that 
impact our costs, here are the regulations that impact our 
costs, and here are the policies that impact our costs so that 
those policies can be changed if the new administration 
chooses, those regulations can be addressed through rulemaking, 
or those laws can be changed.
    So I think my personal position is I am agnostic on those 
things. You know, we are here to serve and to support the 
administration and the Congress. But what--we want to present 
you the facts so that you know why that MILCON premium exists.
    Mr. LaLota. Thanks so much, sir. I appreciate, gentlemen, 
your expertise and your participation in today's hearing.
    Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. Mr. Guest.
    Mr. Guest. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen, thank 
you for being here today.
    Mr. Morrow, you mentioned--in your written testimony you 
talk about the important role that ERDC plays. I am from 
Mississippi, and so I have been--or I had the opportunity to 
visit the facility there in Vicksburg to see the great work 
that they do. My question to you is, as a body, how can 
Congress, how can this committee specifically--what can we do 
to support ERDC's mission and to make sure that you have the 
resources that you need to, as you say in your statement, to 
see that we continue to discover, develop, and deliver trusted 
engineering and scientific solutions to the warfighter and the 
nation?
    Mr. Morrow. Thank you for that.
    So ERDC is an amazing organization across the globe, but 
they serve many, many stakeholders and customers and, like the 
rest of the Corps of Engineers, primarily operate on a 
reimbursable basis. So essentially, everything that the Corps 
does is based in law. So if there is a requirement and somebody 
goes to ERDC to execute that requirement, they get super 
excited to do that.
    So working with industry, some of the pilots, you know, 
whether it is mass timber or additive construction, you know, 
they all, you know, come to ERDC through some legislative 
authority and appropriation. There is no better place, in my 
opinion, for that work to be done. But we--they do need that 
specific authority and appropriation for any of their work.
    Mr. Guest. Thank you.
    Mr. Hamilton, I want to ask you one or two things real 
quickly. You stated in your opening statement--you kind of 
echoed some of the remarks of Mr. Morrow. You say that the 
primary role is to support our warfighters at home and abroad, 
to make U.S. warfighters more lethal, adaptable, and resilient.
    First, thank you for--both of you--for refocusing that 
mission, to making sure that we are putting the emphasis on the 
warfighter, and that we are providing them what they need to 
place--when we place them in harm's way, that they have what 
they need to be able to perform that mission and to come home 
to their family safely.
    Then you talk about different initiatives, some that are 
current, some that are evolving, pre-fabrication being one, 
additive construction, modular construction, all things in 
which we currently are either operating or intend to operate in 
the near future.
    One of the facilities that served in my facility is 
Meridian Naval Air Station. They are home of the Training Air 
Wing ONE. Many of our naval aviators began their initial 
training up there in Meridian before going on for more 
specialized training. One of the projects there that we are 
working toward is one of the hangars there. Hangar two needs a 
new roof facility because of age, because of sometimes some of 
the inclement weather that comes through, particularly in the 
spring and fall, known as tornadoes and wind gusts.
    We used to think that Hurricane Alley was there in the 
west. I believe now it has shifted to coming through the 
southeast, and so we often see those types of weather 
conditions really exacerbate the condition of some of the 
buildings there.
    As we look at these innovations, we know some of these 
innovations are probably better used for new construction, and 
others for things such as renovations to hangar two or 
renovations to other buildings. Kind of talk me through how 
this--these innovations can be used both--again for the new 
construction, but also as we are looking at repairing and 
renovating existing buildings on military facilities.
    Mr. Hamilton. Thank you, Congressman Guest.
    I think we have a real challenge across all the military 
services, but certainly from my place in the Navy and the 
Marine Corps, with aging infrastructure, obsolete 
infrastructure, more repairs than we can afford to make in the 
timeframe they need to be made, and so there is always a 
challenge for us prioritizing.
    I would say, as we have faced some very costly things like 
the Mawar, you know, Typhoon in Guam, where we have had to make 
some emergency repairs to the glass breakwater and other things 
that draw away from planned renovations and modernizations like 
the hangar roof that you spoke to, I do think there are 
opportunities as we go forward to build more resilient 
facilities and more facilities that will last longer because 
our facilities--we may build them for 50 years, we tend to use 
them for 80 or 100 years, and so we have to take that into 
account. I think that gets back to the life cycle cost analysis 
that when we invest in certainly something like a roof, we want 
a roof that is going to last a long time because it is probably 
going to be in place for a very long time.
    But I think that we have to work through that in the, you 
know, both the repair of existing facilities and new 
construction. They are related, but they are different. I do 
believe we have more opportunity to apply some of these new 
technologies in new facilities, because it is very difficult 
sometimes to incorporate or blend these technologies with some 
of the existing facilities. But we do have polymers and fibers 
that we are developing that allow us to reinforce and 
strengthen existing materials like roof trusses or other 
materials that you might find in existing facilities that allow 
us to extend the life of them, and that is another area where I 
think we have benefits to do things faster and cheaper with 
some of the technologies that are being developed.
    Mr. Guest. Thank you very much.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. Thank you, Mr. Guest, and I want to thank the 
panel for being here today.
    I have a real interest in this. I apologize for my voice. 
It will get better tomorrow, I hope.
    We look forward to working with you. I want to come visit 
your lab. Smart things, new things that work good and are 
mobile are fantastic, and we got to make it work.
    The islands are going to be a challenge for the Navy and 
the Army and some others. Guam is a typical example. Labor 
issues, cost overruns, all of these things are going on in 
Guam. We got to get that straight. So I am hoping to take this 
panel over to--for a visit to the islands again, and keep that 
on our forefront because it is real issues.
    Thank you all for being here. I appreciate every one of 
you.
    I got one question for you. If we were using your 
generators when the power went out in Texas, would they have 
worked?
    Mr. Healy. They would have worked, yes. We wouldn't have 
had the freezing buildings and facilities that we had, and the 
health issues that we had, as well.
    Mr. Carter. Okay, good. Thank you. Thanks to the panel.
    We are adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:09 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

                    QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE MILITARY

                                            Tuesday, April 8, 2025.

                               WITNESSES

SERGEANT MAJOR MICHAEL R. WEIMER--DEPARTMENT OF ARMY
MASTER CHIEF PETTY OFFICER JAMES M. HONEA--DEPARTMENT OF NAVY
SERGEANT MAJOR CARLOS A. RUIZ--MARINE CORPS
CHIEF MASTER SERGEANT DAVID A. FLOSI--AIR FORCE
CHIEF MASTER SERGEANT JOHN F. BENTIVENGA--SPACE FORCE
    Mr. Carter. Welcome everybody. We are glad to have you and 
we are going to have a good morning today.
    Today's hearing is on the quality of life for our enlisted 
soldiers, sailors, Marines, Airmen, and Guardians, and their 
families. The five witnesses at the table represent the highest 
enlisted level of leadership for their respective branches.
    I am pleased we are having this hearing again as we begin 
the 2026 cycle because I always like to see you guys first. 
This group of gentlemen have an insight that is critical. This 
hearing is of great importance to the identity of areas we can 
be more helpful for our service members and their families.
    We remain committed to providing quality, high quality 
barracks and family housing but military quality of life is 
much broader. It includes where service members work, training, 
and eat. It includes where their children go to school, where 
their families receive health care.
    So this is an opportunity to discuss the important 
connections between facilities readiness and quality of life. 
Investing in an infrastructure bolsters the military's ability 
to train and fight while also ensuring our service members and 
their families are taken care of at home is just as important. 
We owe that to them.
    Now, before I recognize Ms. Wasserman Schultz, I'm going to 
tell you that 10 days ago or so I received a message from her. 
She said, my team is playing your team.
    My team was Texas Tech and I have been badmouthing you for 
a couple of days and you are welcome to badmouth me and my 
team.
    Being a gentleman, as all Texans are, I ignored that. 
Didn't say one bad word about Ms. Wasserman Schultz or her 
team. But I am glad that my team got beat by the national 
champions. That is good bragging rights. We take all the 
bragging rights we can get in Texas.
    So congratulations. You have much to be proud of, and she 
is obviously a fan.
    I now yield to Ms. Wasserman Schultz for opening remarks.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. What I can 
say is that if you look gentleman up in the dictionary your 
photo is representative of all the meaning of that word. My 
alma mater and our fans have a reputation, rightfully so, for 
being extremely devoted and enthusiastic about our school and 
our school's success. I am a very proud Gator. Three 
generations, seven immediate family members that are Florida 
Gators.
    Before I begin my opening remarks, I will just tout that we 
are now the only Division 1 school that has three football 
national championships, men's football national championships, 
and three men's basketball national championships. The only one 
quite proud. Go Gators.
    There are lots of SEC schools represented here on this 
subcommittee. So most of us root for an SEC school when our own 
teams are not in it and it was fun one sidedly sparring with 
you and thank you for yielding, Judge Carter.
    Thank you once again for holding this essential hearing and 
thank you for, you know, the years of cooperation and mutual 
respect in which we engage and I know that that will continue 
going forward.
    We all know the importance of the quality of life, 
recruitment, and retention to the military services that are 
this Committee's responsibility. Our Committee, on a bipartisan 
basis, has always advocated for and defended our service 
members' quality of life during their active duty and I trust 
that that will continue.
    But this Administration's continued callous disregard for 
service members, veterans, and their families threatens to 
overturn any progress that the services have made in their 
efforts. The Administration has fired at least 6,000 veterans 
across the government, including at the VA, which provides 
essential promise benefits to our veterans.
    They are also targeting deep cuts to programs across the 
federal government that veterans and service members rely upon, 
including SNAP, WIC, and financial aid, while deploying an 
economic strategy that has started a trade war and sent global 
stocks tumbling.
    At the Department of Defense the plan to fire 5,400 
probationary employees and the civilian hiring freeze has sent 
the agency into chaos while unfairly making the lives of our 
service members more difficult.
    The chaotic rollout of this hiring freeze has also left 
current civilian employees in limbo and essential jobs 
unfulfilled, often falling to our service members to take on 
double duty. We have heard reports that barracks managers and 
sexual assault prevention teams are among those included in 
this freeze, which will directly harm quality of life and 
increase the workload of active-duty service members.
    Unfortunately, a similar pattern of a chaotic rollout of 
DoD's remote and telework policy has hampered opportunities for 
military spouses to telework. This telework made it easier for 
service members and their families to adjust to frequent moves.
    This chaos does not make it easier for people to serve 
their country, and we certainly should not be actively 
denigrating those who do choose to serve, such as is the case 
with Secretary Hegseth's ban on transgender individuals openly 
serving in the military.
    This order is not only cruel and pointless, it is 
counterproductive to the DoD's own goals of increasing 
recruitment and retention by needlessly reducing the recruiting 
pool for reasons which have nothing to do with an individual's 
qualifications or whether their skills are needed by the 
services.
    Another example of this Administration's misplaced 
priorities is its push to erase history when DoD should focus 
its energy on real issues like holding privatized housing 
companies accountable for lead paint in family housing or 
addressing the deficit of housing for unaccompanied service 
members. Not on purging websites honoring the Air Force's first 
female fighter pilot who is a constituent, by the way, or World 
War II Women's Air Force Service pilots.
    The Administration's history purge also apparently extends 
to the Tuskegee Airmen, as the Air Force removed training 
videos, including them, until public outcry forced the 
department to reverse course.
    How do these actions show service members that we value 
their service and the sacrifices their families make? What 
effect do you think these actions will have on the efforts of 
military recruiters across the nation?
    We should honor the service of those in uniform and fight 
for the quality of life of all of our service members. To truly 
improve the quality of life of those service members, we must 
address the continued deficiencies in barracks and privatized 
family housing. We must address sexual assault in the military, 
we must address shortages in childcare, and we must invest in 
the mental health of our troops.
    These actions are essential so that service members can 
focus on their important jobs instead of worrying about who 
will watch their children, whether they will get sick from the 
mold in their homes or whether they are safe in their 
workplace.
    This Subcommittee has recognized the value of these 
investments on a bipartisan basis, and I look forward to 
working together with my colleagues again for Fiscal Year 2026 
to address these issues.
    I was incredibly disappointed by the way the Fiscal Year 
2025 process ended and the missed opportunity for this 
Committee to make the necessary investments to build on our 
progress in recent years addressing quality of life projects.
    Nevertheless, we will be closely monitoring the spend plans 
DoD submits for the full year Continuing Resolution funding and 
I want to make it clear to everyone here today, my expectation 
is that the services prioritize those funds in a way that 
delivers on the promises made in the FY25 budget requests and 
in consideration of the bipartisan advocacy from members of the 
Subcommittee to invest in quality of life.
    The spend plans must reflect the need for an importance of 
child development centers, barracks, schools, and other quality 
of life projects. The Army's FY25 budget request contained 
robust funding for barracks construction to tackle the 
service's housing deficiencies.
    The Marine Corps has a comprehensive plan called Barracks 
2030 for barracks investments. We cannot backtrack and sideline 
these types of projects. Even great plans to improve quality of 
life will fail if they are not accompanied by appropriate 
funding.
    Moreover, I hope the FY26 budget request, when we get it, 
contains a robust request for quality-of-life projects. I hope 
to hear from all of our witnesses today on how you and your 
service have worked since the hearing last year to address the 
inadequacies and oversight of privatized military housing 
providers, improve the maintenance of unaccompanied housing, 
and address the root causes of sexual assault within the 
military.
    I want to thank the five witnesses for being in being here 
today, for your service, and for your valuable testimony.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. Okay, now we will turn to our witnesses.
    Without objection, your entire written testimony will be 
included in the record.
    I will now recognize each of you for the opening statement 
and we will then proceed with questions.
    We start with Sergeant Major of the Army Michael Weimer. 
Sergeant Major.

               STATEMENT OF SERGEANT MAJOR WEIMER

    Sergeant Major Weimer. Chairman Carter, Ranking Member 
Wasserman Schultz, distinguished members of this panel, thank 
you for the invitation to speak on behalf of the soldier's, 
their families, and the Army civilians who make up the all-
volunteer force.
    I want to start off with the fact that I'm proud of 
everything that our soldiers have accomplished. They are fully 
focused and prepared to respond to their nation's call. Our 
soldiers remain engaged worldwide. More than 109,000 soldiers 
are deployed across the globe in support of either the nation, 
our allies, or our partners.
    Standing ready we have 74,000 soldiers serving as part of 
the immediate or crisis response forces and critical to the 
success of those soldiers is their families. Their dedication, 
sacrifice and endurance through the stress of their soldiers 
being away from home or prepared to deploy at a moment's notice 
is unwavering.
    The recent loss of our four teammates from 3rd Infantry 
Division in Lithuania has only affirmed this commitment.
    Our purpose, direction and motivation remain aligned with 
our four focus areas. The first focus area, war fighting. The 
second focus area, delivering ready combat formations. The 
third, continuous transformation. And the fourth, strengthen 
the profession.
    My role is to ensure we're ready to fight tonight if 
deterrence fails. As the tip of the spear in Europe and as the 
backbone of the joint force in the Indo-Pacific. The Army 
responds in times of crisis and is ready to fight and win when 
the nation calls.
    This starts with training management. We are reinforcing 
the importance of leader's obligation to provide stable and 
predictable training management to give soldiers and their 
families time to plan against life's events that due to the 
nature of our mission to defend our nation and its interests 
often take us away from home for stretches of time.
    At home station soldiers and families expect and deserve 
quality living conditions. We are dedicated to improving and 
sustaining quality living conditions for accompanied and 
unaccompanied personnel housing.
    Equally important are CDC's. We've streamlined the hiring 
process to combat staffing challenges and increase capacity as 
well as provide fee assistance to offset costs for 
installations and community-based childcare.
    Spouses are vital to Army readiness. Enhancing spouse 
employment supports military families and retention. Launching 
the Department of the Army Volunteer Reassignment Program and 
providing employment readiness programs aids spouses during PCS 
moves reducing unemployment gaps and providing job 
predictability.
    In support of our exceptional family members we are 
continuing to improve how our Enterprise EFMP interacts with 
our personnel system and improves communication to ensure 
appropriate medical and education services are available to all 
exceptional family members around the world.
    Army installations require the right capabilities and 
capacity to support our formations. We're making tough 
decisions with our budget to ensure we transform at the speed 
of need but scale is our challenge.
    It requires that our installations transform alongside the 
formations that call them home. New technology, new kit, and 
new equipment all matter, but if infrastructure doesn't support 
transformation efforts, it will negatively affect readiness.
    Soldiers, families, and the larger Defense community's 
quality of life depends on and is impacted by quality, 
suitability and the conditions of their living and workplaces.
    So far this year, we're on glide path to meet our 
recruiting and retention goals. Future Soldier Prep Course 
continues to successfully meet Americans where they're at and 
help them answer their calling to serve.
    With work still to be done, we will not let off the gas in 
the pursuit of reducing harmful behaviors. We're committed to 
strengthening the profession and expanding our efforts across 
the entire force. We're focused on increasing lethality and we 
will be ready when the nation calls.
    Maintaining this focus is paramount to our success. It 
requires that we continue to improve quality of life for our 
soldiers and families. Continuous Resolutions and flat budgets 
do not support stability or predictability that our soldiers 
and families deserve and it exacerbates quality of life issues.
    Thank you for the work you have done to support your Army. 
It has been my honor to serve this past 30 years and the 
impacts of your support could not be more clear. I appreciate 
the opportunity and I look forward to your questions.
    [The information follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    
    
    Mr. Carter. Thank you, Sergeant Major.
    We will now go to Master Chief Petty Officer James Honea.
    I will tell you a little story. I was at the vet the other 
day the guy walks in with his dog, is covered in flags and Go 
Navy. I said, what's the name of your dog? He said, Master 
Chief Petty Officer Dog. We call him Chief. I said, you must be 
in the Navy.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Probably really damn good 
dog, I bet you.
    Mr. Carter. Oh, a damn good dog.

         STATEMENT OF MASTER CHIEF PETTY OFFICER HONEA

    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Yeah. Chairman Carter and 
Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz also is a gentleman from Texas 
that also happens to be from Lubbock, Texas, I will also convey 
the, you know, the sentiments of Judge Carter and 
congratulations, go Gators, on all things there. But I will say 
this is that if you look up, gentleman in the dictionary, 
you'll still find Judge Carter's picture there published. My 
picture will never be there to replace that. We'll keep that 
one offline if you don't mind please.
    Thank you all very, very much and as well as all the other 
distinguished members of the Subcommittee, I thank you for the 
opportunity to speak and more importantly, thank you for the 
good work that you do on behalf of our sailors and their 
families.
    Our Navy's strength, grit, and professionalism continue to 
ensure the security and prosperity of our nation and sailors 
perform best when they are focused on war fighting, knowing 
their families are well supported and we appreciate Congress's 
ongoing efforts to improve their quality of life.
    However, budget constraints since 2013 have hindered 
consistent support creating uncertainty for our service 
members. To grow our Navy we need a stable defense budget that 
invests in the sailors, their families and a culture of 
continued service.
    When we invest in our Navy we remain unmatched and history 
shows this from the Great White Fleet to the Cold War. I urge 
Congress to continue investing in our Navy to strengthen our 
lethality and maintain our platforms and to take care of our 
war fighters.
    Improving quality of life is crucial for our sailors and 
their families and four key areas that require attention: 
increasing access to medical care, supporting families with 
employment and childcare, investing in housing, and ensuring 
the professional and academic development of our war fighters.
    Access to quality medical care is essential to maintain an 
all-volunteer force. While progress has been made, funding 
shortages in the military health system and the Defense Health 
Agency continue to affect care and provider recruitment. When 
care isn't available with inside our military treatment 
facilities we rely on the civilian networks but limited 
resources have impacted care delivery, provider recruitment, 
and TRICARE's ability to compete in the civilian insurance 
market.
    TRICARE's reimbursement rates based on Medicare rates are 
often too low and delayed claim processing has damaged our 
trust in civilian partners. The Navy is committed in supporting 
the Defense Health Agency and we are working to improve 
civilian hiring, recruiting, and salary competitiveness.
    I ask for your continued support in fully funding the 
military health system and finding innovative ways to ensure 
our Defense Health Agency's funding doesn't compete with our 
war fighting priorities.
    Our military families are crucial to our service members' 
success. We recruit the sailor, but we retain the family and my 
wife will, while she may not have come in my sea bag, she has 
certainly helped me carry that thing for many years and we must 
continue to support in our families as they support us.
    Many families, especially service members, rely on the dual 
income for financial stability and with your help we can assist 
them in finding that balance. Continued support across the 
federal enterprise to expanding employment opportunities for 
all military spouses will help provide continued career growth 
and maintain financial stability, especially during those PCS 
moves.
    Another vital resource is quality childcare. Investments in 
child and youth programs have made a significant impact and I 
thank you all for that. Increased funding for Child Development 
Program facilities has reduced our Child Development Center 
wait list to an all-time low for the last 21 years and expanded 
fee assistance has allowed families to choose quality childcare 
when CDCs are not available.
    However, shortages in facilities and staffing remain 
challenged. I believe that combining our CDC projects and fee 
assistance based on local need will address childcare 
shortfalls and if we approach childcare as a department-wide 
issue rather than service specific, we can solve it even more 
effectively.
    I thank you also for the support of Basic Allowance for 
Housing for our junior enlisted sailors that will allow our 
junior sailors on sea duty to either live in unaccompanied 
housing or rent locally and that will improve their work-life 
balance.
    The enhancement of the Military Housing Privatization 
Initiative to expand public/private venture projects for both 
the Hampton Roads and the San Diego region will provide an 
additional almost 12,000 beds.
    I believe this will rapidly increase our sailor's quality 
of life and allow leadership the flexibility needed so that 
every sailor has the appropriate separation of work and home 
life.
    I know Congress is invested in improving not only our 
unaccompanied housing but also our family housing and I look 
forward to continuing to work with this Committee in 
accomplishing this goal.
    Technical skills alone, though, don't make an exceptional 
war fighter. Professional development and continuing education 
are equally vital. Education empowers our force and gives our 
sailors the need to outthink and out fight any challenge.
    Enlisted leadership development is building more capable, 
confident leaders through a lifelong learning continuum. It 
starts early in a sailor's career and grows with them into 
senior leadership.
    I urge your continued support for enlisted education, 
investments in enlisted leader development, and the United 
States Naval Community College as they are essential to 
enhancing readiness and producing agile, innovative, and lethal 
warfighters.
    I am honored to serve alongside warfighters who stand ready 
to defend our homeland, support our allies and partners, and 
protect the American way of life. As we navigate challenging 
budgetary decisions, it is essential that we continue to 
properly equip, train and position our force to fight and win.
    Equally important is recognizing that quality of life 
directly impacts warfighter readiness. Expanding access to 
medical care, strengthening family readiness and ensuring 
sailors have a clear separation between their home and work 
life are vital to developing a force that is smarter, stronger 
and truly valued.
    I thank you all and look forward to your questions.
    [The information follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    
    
    Mr. Carter. Thank you, Chief.
    Excuse me. Now we will hear for Sergeant Major of the 
Marine Corps, Carlos Ruiz.
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. Thank you, Chairman. I appreciate it.
    First, if I could acknowledge my beautiful bride to the 
left of me one seat back.
    Mr. Carter. You did real well, boy.

                STATEMENT OF SERGEANT MAJOR RUIZ

    Sergeant Major Ruiz. It's for my own safety, sir. A former 
Marine herself of 22 years and a champion for spouses and 
single parents throughout the force.
    So with that, good morning, Chairman Carter, Ranking Member 
Wasserman Schultz, and members of the Subcommittee, thank you 
for this opportunity to work together for the well-being of our 
service members and their families.
    Marines today stand ready to support and defend the 
Constitution. Looming threats and global crises remain ever 
present and America looks to us to defend, protect, and when 
needed, violently execute. We do not ask for the task to be 
made easier, only for the resources to do it well.
    We are here today to ensure that Marines are trained, 
housed, and equipped in a manner befitting their 250 years of 
excellence. Despite the challenges faced in recruiting the past 
few years, the Marine Corps never compromised on standards.
    We uphold the rigorous qualifications demanded by a war 
fighting ethos. We do not lower the bar. We challenge America's 
best to rise to it. Last year, the Commandant deliberately 
increased the number of recruiters across the nation. This 
investment in both quality and quantity is not without cost, 
but it is necessary to ensure the long-term strength and 
readiness of our force.
    In FY24, the unbeatable work of our recruiters, along with 
historically high retention rates within the force, resulted in 
the service achieving its required end strength. The message is 
clear. Marines love being Marines.
    Over the past year, I have seen tangible improvements to 
infrastructure across the Corps but we are not done yet. The 
Commandant and I remain committed to the Barracks 2030 plan.
    In 2024, we repaired or renovated 11 barracks, and in 2025 
we identified 12 more for upgrades. Together these projects 
affect over 8,000 Marines. Multiyear investments into where 
Marines and their families live continue across our bases and 
stations in the U.S. and overseas. It is what Marines deserve.
    War fighting excellence is not built in isolation rather, 
it is fostered through programs and resources supporting 
Marines physical, mental, social, and spiritual development 
across a range of initiatives.
    So to that end, we are implementing Marine Corps Total 
Fitness, a network of support for Marines and families that 
addresses readiness and resilience in all stages of service. 
Every element of this program builds on our foundation of 
discipline, self-reliance, and purpose larger than self.
    I'm excited about the strides we've made so far, and I'm 
looking forward to its expansion and its growth. Marine 
strength and resilience fortify them from the inside, while 
individual combat equipment protects them from the outside.
    The rapid evolution of war fighting technology requires us 
to modernize our gear while the timeless principles of war 
dictate that we preserve our battle proven legacies. As a 
result, our personal protective equipment must protect Marines 
not only from enemy fire, but also from emerging threats.
    In our push to modernize platforms and weapons with the 
latest technologies, the protection of our most important asset 
must be counted among those investments. The Marine Corps is 
not just the branch of service. It is a promise. A promise that 
no matter the odds, no matter the fight, Marines are ready, 
willing, and able to answer the call. That is the standard. 
That is the expectation. That is the reality that has defined 
the Corps for 250 years.
    Marines will always be the reason America's enemies fear 
what awaits them on the other side. I look forward to working 
with you to ensure Marines have the resources they need to win. 
I look forward to your questions.
    [The information follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]  
    
    
    Mr. Carter. Thank you, Sergeant Major.
    Now we will hear from Chief Master Sergeant of the Air 
Force, David Flosi.

            STATEMENT OF CHIEF MASTER SERGEANT FLOSI

    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. Chairman Carter, Ranking 
Member Wasserman Schultz, distinguished members of the 
Subcommittee, I'm honored to join my fellow service senior 
enlisted advisors providing testimony today.
    While there's always work to be done on this important 
subject make no mistake, your Air Force is the most lethal and 
ready-flying force in the world. I humbly represent more than 
670,000 total Force Airmen who remain ready to deliver air 
power anytime, anywhere.
    Thanks to each of you for your commitment to the quality of 
life of our service members. We need our Airmen laser focused 
on lethality and readiness and your support allows us to 
execute our important mission.
    Today we confront strategic adversaries who are contesting 
every domain while intimidating and coercing our allies and 
partners around the world. China is aggressively expanding 
their lethal capabilities while Russia, Iran, North Korea and a 
variety of non-state actors continue to threaten American 
interests around the world.
    In the face of this complex global strategic environment, 
we rely on our greatest strength, our Airmen, to out compete 
our adversaries. Since I last testified before this Committee, 
our Airmen have been busy, busy repelling complex Iranian drone 
and missile attacks against our allies, disrupting and 
defeating Houthi attacks on international shipping, and 
providing humanitarian assistance to victims of natural 
disasters at home and abroad, all while transforming our force 
to successfully execute our mission in contested environments.
    We cannot afford for our Airmen to be distracted by 
inadequate housing, lack of access to health care and 
childcare, or other quality of life issues. Years of continuing 
resolutions and budgetary uncertainty required your Air Force 
to manage increasing risks, creating challenges for our Airmen.
    We ask for your support in overcoming these difficulties to 
ensure our Airmen can focus on their main thing, defending this 
great nation and our way of life. While there are several 
quality-of-life issues to discuss, I'd like to highlight a few 
specifically. Dorms, access to health care and childcare, and 
pay and compensation, which all directly impact force 
readiness.
    When it comes to dorms, we continue to focus our resources 
in this area. For our most junior war fighters we've dedicated 
more than a billion dollars across the FYDP to building dorm 
capacity where shortfalls exist, while also improving existing 
dorms. Thank you for your continued advocacy on this topic.
    In addition, there are challenges in accessing healthcare 
services impacting our force readiness, particularly specialty 
and mental health care. We're committed to working with the 
Defense Health Agency and we're working hard on this in our 
department as well.
    Our service members are benefiting from the Wingman-
Guardian Connect program, which focuses on building 
connections, detecting risk, and promoting protective 
environments for our junior enlisted force.
    We're dedicated to supporting the mental well-being of our 
Airmen and removing any stigma associated with seeking help 
when our Airmen need it. Force readiness is also impacted by 
available childcare. We continue to find ways to expand access 
to safe, affordable childcare options and support programs.
    Additionally, the Department is working to further support 
families by improving spousal employment opportunities through 
reimbursement initiatives for both relicensing and small 
business startup costs due to relocation.
    With respect to pay and compensation, recent increases in 
military pay will especially help our junior tier. We need to 
address compression in the military pay table for our NCOs to 
ensure they are properly compensated for their leadership 
responsibility and technical expertise.
    I've served as your Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force 
for just over a year now. In that time, I've traveled across 
the globe to connect with our Airmen and to see firsthand the 
barriers they face in accomplishing the mission.
    I've learned no matter how much we work to improve quality 
of life, we will not get the desired effect as an Air Force if 
we don't focus on excess infrastructure. While it may not seem 
directly related to improving the quality of life of our 
Airmen, I assure you it's directly tied.
    Over the past 30 years, we've eliminated 60 percent of our 
fighter squadrons, 40 percent of our end strength, but only 15 
percent of our installations. Today, 30 percent of our 
infrastructure is excess to need. It all requires funding and 
manpower to maintain but provides no benefit to the mission our 
Airmen or our Nation.
    Divesting, consolidating, and/or reallocating this 
infrastructure will free up funding to improve quality of life 
and the quality of our service. We must continue to leverage 
every option to ensure the quality of life for our Airmen is 
commensurate with the responsibility of protecting this great 
nation.
    I want to thank this Subcommittee for its unwavering 
support on these and many other important issues.
    Our Airmen, backed by their families and communities, stand 
ready. Thank you. I look forward to your questions.
    [The information follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    
    
    Mr. Carter. Thank you, Chief Master Sergeant.
    Now we'll hear from Chief Master Sergeant John Bentivenga.
    Chief Master Sergeant Bentivenga. Bentivenga.
    Mr. Carter. Bentivenga.

         STATEMENT OF CHIEF MASTER SERGEANT BENTIVENGA

    Chief Master Sergeant Bentivenga. Thank you. Thank you, 
Chairman Carter, and Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz, and 
distinguished members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the 
opportunity to discuss the critical importance of investing in 
the well-being of our Guardians.
    With the United States Space Force now in our fifth year, 
the Nation faces an increasingly complex global security 
environment. The Secretary of Defense has been clear that to 
meet these challenges we must restore the warrior ethos, we 
must rebuild our military and we must reestablish deterrence. 
Nowhere is this more critical than in the space domain, where 
our Guardians stand as a visible front line, ensuring our 
nation's continued access to and freedom to operate in the 
space domain, the very foundation of space superiority.
    The Space Force was established to deliver space 
superiority and address the needs of our joint warfighters in a 
rapidly evolving national security environment. The space 
domain has become increasingly competitive and contested, so 
our greatest risk is to remain with the status quo.
    While the Space Force represents only 3 percent of the 
Defense budget, it underpins joint force capabilities across 
all domains. During the April 2024 Iranian missile attack, 
members of the 2nd Space Warning Squadron provided missile 
warning data that helped enable the interception of incoming 
projectiles and minimize casualties.
    Right now, Guardians from the 18th Space Defense Squadron 
are tracking over 47,000 orbiting objects, an 89 percent 
increase since the service was established, ensuring space 
situation awareness for safe operations, including support to 
NASA and the International Space Station.
    Tonight, members of the 2nd Navigation Warfare Squadron 
will be providing highly integrated position navigation and 
timing capabilities to the agricultural, finance, and 
transportation sectors of the United States economy.
    As our Space Force truths state, the US Space Force's 
capabilities are critical to the joint force and the American 
way of life. Maintaining our advantage in space demands 
commensurate investment in our most critical system, the human 
weapons system, our Guardians.
    Service members do not choose to stay in uniform because 
it's easy. They do so because it's challenging, but they 
understand the rewards of service are priceless. Quality of 
life investments that elevate the journey will attract and 
retain the talent the nation demands and the department needs.
    This is why I look forward to working on the 
recommendations made by the 14th Quadrennial Review of Military 
Compensation. Updating Basic Allowance for Housing 
methodologies, improving cost of living allowance calculation 
policies, and raising the regular military compensation 
benchmark are all vital initiatives to military life.
    I also believe the recommended holistic quality of life 
review will provide informed and actionable data that will 
improve access to childcare and healthcare benefits as well as 
advanced military spouse employment initiatives. To provide a 
superior Guardian experience, quality of life programs that 
elevate the journey must be coupled with quality-of-service 
investments that cultivate the warfighter.
    World class training and development are crucial for our 
Guardians who will employ all capabilities, kinetic and non-
kinetic, to ensure space control. To meet the joint forces' 
evolving needs and stay ahead of strategic rivals our ability 
to develop the force for Guardians by Guardians must also 
mature.
    The capacity to scout, train, and educate space minded 
warfighters beyond our current end strength increases will 
require appropriations and infrastructure investments. These 
initiatives will help create the future of space power and 
build a more lethal force for generations to come.
    This is particularly critical as the space domain itself is 
becoming increasingly dynamic. The rapid growth in global space 
activity, while indicative of progress, also creates new 
vulnerabilities. We are witnessing a concerning shift from 
theoretical threats in space to daily occurrences.
    Our adversaries are actively developing and deploying 
systems designed to deny, degrade, and disrupt our space 
capabilities, jeopardizing the very advantages space provides 
our nation and our allies.
    The complexity and scale of these threats make it clear 
that the Space Force cannot succeed alone. Our ability to 
integrate seamlessly with the joint force, cultivate 
partnerships with the commercial space industry and strengthen 
alliances with partner nations will be essential to overcoming 
resource limitations and building a more resilient space 
architecture.
    Members of this Subcommittee five minutes is barely enough 
time to give me--allow me to talk about the importance of 
quality of life and quality of service for our Guardians. But 
if I may, I'd like to leave you with three key takeaways 
regarding the Space Force.
    First, the Space Force represents only 3 percent of the 
Defense budget yet underpins the lethality of joint force and 
safeguards the very fabric of American way of life.
    Second, the Space Force has operated under a continuing 
resolution for 51 percent of our existence, limiting our 
ability to evolve as necessary. Third, the Space Force, to 
maintain space superiority, needs significant investment in our 
growth and development, and that's imperative.
    I am eager to collaborate with the Subcommittee to provide 
our Guardians the tools and resources they need to succeed. 
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
    [The information follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    
    
    The Chairman. Okay, thank you very much, Chief, and we'll 
now begin questions. These have a rough five minute time period 
on them. We'll have some slack we can cut, but I'm more talking 
to my folks up here than you, but we're trying to find out some 
stuff. I'm going to start off.
    September of 2023, GAO report on unaccompanied housing was 
a wake-up call. It detailed barracks and dormitories with 
unacceptable health, safety, and privacy concerns. That report 
included 31 recommendations that included both OSD and service 
level recommendations.
    How far along are each of your services in terms of 
addressing the GAO recommendations? Do you have an estimate of 
the cost and timeline needed to fully implement all GAO 
recommendations? Are there any policy changes that would help 
alleviate capacity shortages? For instance, would allowing 
single E-5s in the Army and Marines to move out of the barracks 
help?
    The response to barracks challenges does not necessarily 
require one size fits all approach across each installation. 
What is the appropriate mix of barracks refurbishment versus 
new construction? Finally, what role should public/private 
partnerships and leases play? A lot of questions. Who wants to 
start?
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Chairman, I'll jump on that one. 
There is a lot there, but it's a great question, and you've 
given us an opportunity truly--to truly let the committee know 
where we are.
    So, we took the findings of the GAO report, and in 
conjunction with last year's NDAA, and really we had to do some 
work to truly see ourselves holistically. So, our conditions 
index, we've been able to scrub our entire inventory, and the 
Army has obviously a very large inventory of barracks.
    So, we can truly--we can truly tell you now which ones have 
that below 70 percent index. We're trying to make sure we 
stretch every dollar to the furthest extent available.
    We know where we are with budgets. So, trying unique 
authorities, like the repair to replace that we're utilizing 
actually at Cavazos to--I don't want to say get creative, but 
to truly figure out how to get our barracks in better 
condition, if not full MILCON replacement, because that's the 
hardest of all the solutions. That's an example--that's an 
example of one.
    To your E-5 question, and I'll pass to my teammates, we 
already made this decision last year in Europe for E-6s. E-6s 
are authorized out of the barracks in Europe to increase 
barracks bedspaces, but there are issues with that. 
Downpayments for housing off base in Europe are incredibly 
high.
    We had to be careful we weren't putting our single E-6s in 
a different financial predicament. Then lastly, young E-5s that 
want to live in the barracks are great leaders in the barracks. 
It's good for them, and it's also great for the privates in the 
barracks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Mr. Chairman, also in the 
Navy we did a comprehensive review of all of our installations, 
and all the buildings that we're using for our barracks right 
now, and our condition index score, we're not good. About 15 
percent are considered to be in good condition. About 60 
percent were considered to be acceptable, and the remaining 25 
percent are unacceptable condition.
    We need a lot of work to bring all of that back up to 
speed, and then beginning with--as I--as I--as I've said before 
to this committee in the past, we already operate in a deficit. 
We have considered for many years ships to be considered 
acceptable government quarters for our most junior enlisted 
sailors that are assigned on board a ship. To remove them off 
the ship and into a barracks room, we're going to need even 
more beds.
    We do have a comprehensive plan, and a timeline on building 
the necessary unaccompanied housing. The fastest path to that 
will not be through military construction. The fastest path 
through that is an expansion of our PPV programs, and the 
pilots that we currently operate within San Diego and within 
the Norfolk region.
    As I said earlier in my opening testimony--opening 
statement, we're going to increase that capacity by about 
another 12,000 beds in those two fleet concentration areas, and 
that will probably solve the majority of our housing problems 
in those areas for sailors assigned to those ships.
    But we need to be able to expand on that in our other home 
ports--other fleet concentration areas, whether it's in the 
Pacific Northwest, or in the great state of Florida, down there 
in Mayport, Florida.
    I'm looking for more ability to be able to expand on those 
barracks programs, and then do it just as you said for the E-
5s. We're looking at that across the board. Where could we move 
people out into town, and afford them housing allowance, and 
it'd be that E-4 and above--or E-4 over four years, wherever we 
think that it's most appropriate. We got a long road to go. 
There's still a lot of work to do.
    The biggest barrier to that is having a dependable budget, 
you know, that we can--we can begin construction with on time, 
as well as everything that we need for modernization and 
sustainment dollars to go into those buildings.
    I mean, as I said in my opening statement since 2013 we 
have not had a dependable budget to--for the maintenance, 
modernization, and sustainment of those buildings, and those 
buildings are in really bad repair because of that. Thank you, 
sir.
    The Chairman. I'd like to say that first off, I think I can 
say without hesitation everyone on this dais is an 
appropriator, and we don't like CRs. We know you don't like 
them, and we don't like them. We do all the work, and then the 
work doesn't get done. They just pass all the work we've done.
    It's one of those frustrating things you do, because the 
best work is done by the Appropriations Committee in Congress, 
and we're the only people that get things done, and then they 
throw us out like the trash--I'm sorry, I'm preaching now.
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. I appreciate the opportunity. The GA 
report really spawned the buildup of Barracks 2030. This is--we 
were on our way there anyway as the commandant came in with a 
very focused approached to human beings and getting after the 
infrastructure.
    So, the GA report, although it focused on a few barracks, 
we said no, we need to inspect every place that every Marine 
puts their head down to try to get some rest, and we did that.
    The reports are not good, and so, the commandant put his 
money where his mouth is, and he got after the refurbishing of 
barracks. We do need help, as Chief Flosi stated, the amount of 
buildings that I need to knock down, it's an expensive nature 
there to do. Sometimes more expensive than building new.
    So while we can, we refurbish, and get after what we were 
able to do quickly in delivering the impact to the Marines 
immediately, and they see that, and they want to stay, because 
they see effort, right? They may not see a brand new building 
in their time in the service, but at least they see that, hey, 
at least my buddy is getting a decent barracks.
    For us, it's expensive to move sergeants around town, 
absolutely. Especially around places like, I don't know, 
California or overseas, so we are very careful with that, but I 
think what I'll say in addition to that, Chairman, is that for 
the Corps, the barracks is a place where we continue to develop 
the warrior ethos of a Marine.
    So, it's critical that I have two Marines per room, and I 
know they hate me when I say that, but I need them to be two 
per room, and I need the NCO down the line to ensure that 
they're there to check on them, to take care of them, that 
they're not alone. It's part of the transformation process, 
sir.
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. Thank you, Chairman. Your Air 
Force has invested more than a billion dollars over the 
facility sustainment, restorization [sic] and modernization of 
our dorms specifically, and thankfully we've started in a 
little bit better place with our dorms on average.
    We have a dorm master plan that has looked at all of our 
facilities across the entire enterprise, and we do not have any 
of our dorms in failing condition today across the Air Force. 
We're continuing to invest in the dorms.
    We do have Airmen dorm leaders, assigned active duty NCOs 
assigned to each of our barracks around the--around the Air 
Force. We also--we also have had success with the MILCON 
appropriation on our dorms specifically. So, we've got projects 
programmed in across the FYDP at several of our installations 
to the tune of several hundred million dollars.
    What we're trying to do, much like my Marine counterpart 
here, we're trying to balance excess infrastructure in 
locations where we have excess infrastructure that we need to 
get rid of, so we can get it off our denominator, and invest 
appropriately in the locations where we have capacity issues.
    So, we look for your support there. We've done--we've done 
the analysis, and while it is expensive to demolish, we know 
it's about a ten to one return on investment.
    So over time, it was a really good use of taxpayer dollars 
to get rid of excess infrastructure, and consolidate and focus 
our resources on the infrastructure. We really need to take 
care of our Airmen, especially at that early stage in their 
careers. No huge concerns there, sir, on dorms for the Air 
Force, but we're continuing to focus and invest to make sure it 
stays that way.
    The Chairman. Well, I like the fact you're looking at 
things that we can demolish so we don't have to take care of 
them. We'll visit more about that.
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. Sounds good. Thank you, sir.
    The Chairman. Chief.
    Chief Master Sergeant Bentivenga. Mr. Chairman, thank you 
so much. We have a much smaller footprint than the Army and the 
other services on the Space Force side, with the dormitories on 
Space Force installations. When we looked at all the dormitory 
conditions, like Chief Flosi said, across the Department of the 
Air Force, we don't have any dormitories in failing conditions.
    In fact, the dormitories in Space Force installations are 
81 percent which are acceptable condition, which are actually 
pretty good when you think about it, but the thing for us is, 
consistent funding that allows us to maintain where we are, and 
also to gain traction.
    Chief Flosi mentioned the dormitory master plan. I believe 
it was early 2022 when the department issued the department 
master plan. It was estimated about $280 million for Space 
Force dormitories to be risen to the 85 or above level on the 
building condition index, but continuous resolutions and our 
inability to do the planning and the funding to keep those 
contracts on target, on time, is always a challenge. We don't 
want to lose any momentum that we have with the conditions of 
the dormitories where our young men and women are living today.
    Moving forward, as I said in my opening statement, in order 
for the service to grow and develop to be able to execute space 
superiority for the nation, we're going to have to grow end 
strength, which is going to mean an increase in our junior 
enlisted individuals who will be living in the dorms--right 
now, E-1 through E-4 within the Department of the Air Force.
    We're going to look at the lessons learned from our 
counterparts across the other services. Is it traditional 
military construction? Is it a combination of partnerships 
downtown? How do we get after that to make sure that we can 
meet the demand of the nation, but also provide quality housing 
for our most junior, most vulnerable men and women who join the 
service?
    The Chairman. Thank you. I will now yield to Ms. Wasserman 
Schultz.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to 
come back to your unaccompanied housing focus as well, but 
first I want to focus on the privatized military family 
housing, because I continue to see unacceptable reports of 
inadequate, unsafe housing conditions provided by privatized 
housing providers.
    To highlight just one of the latest examples, Balfour 
Beatty is being sued by military families, again. They've had 
two instances in which they have paid multi-million dollar 
settlements.
    It continues to--I mean, there's not a word--frustrate is 
not a strong enough word, but the fact that these contracts 
were so complex that it made it impossible for us supposedly to 
unwind them, and to disconnect these companies who are grossly 
irresponsible, and could care less about the occupants of the 
housing for which they are required to take care of doesn't 
bode well in my opinion for the future of oversight and care of 
the servicemembers who live in unaccompanied housing either.
    So, it really chaps me when I hear you all talking about, 
well, the solution to the unaccompanied housing crisis that you 
have is to go in the direction of more privatized housing.
    Sure, when they're brand-spanking-new, and they don't have 
any problems, it sounds great, but I want to make sure that 
it--I don't think that you should go forward with that 
privatized housing concept, but if you go forward with it, then 
you have to make sure that these are contracts that can be 
unwound easily, and the companies can be fired and disconnected 
from the abuse that Balfour Beatty and others have been engaged 
in.
    So that having been said, this lawsuit even claims that 
Balfour Beatty officials blocked Navy personnel from inspecting 
houses in some cases, and that's just the latest example of 
that oversight of those privatized housing providers by the 
military services needs to continue to be strengthened.
    So over the last several years, our subcommittee has 
consistently provided an additional $10 million per year 
through the Family Housing Operations and Maintenance Accounts 
for each service for the purpose of housing oversight.
    There wasn't that layer there, and each branch of the 
service has acknowledged that they dropped the ball, and 
completely were hands off for many, many years about overseeing 
the companies that are supposed to be responsible for taking 
care of these--of the housing that they've built, and that they 
then care for.
    So, it's clear that we continue to need that funding to be 
used for oversight purposes, and quickly, I'd like each of you 
to say what plans you have for the use of the funds that were 
available in FY-25 in the CR, and for FY-26, presuming that--
and hopefully that it will continue. Sergeant Major Weimer.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Ranking Member, thank you for that, 
and I, like you, have similar concerns when we--when we talked 
privatized--potential privatized barracks solutions. I just 
wanted to acknowledge that up front.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. 25 years in the privatized housing, 
we have to take those lessons learned. We have to utilize those 
for any new ventures. Specifically on the Army side, that money 
we've been using for third party inspections. I'm happy to 
actually report right now, CONUS, we are a hundred percent 
complete on the privatized third party inspections.
    We're now 82 percent complete OCONUS, and so we still have 
some work to do the rest of the year for OCONUS. We're 
predicting to be done by 2026 on that, and we'll continue to 
use that money.
    Ironically, now we're inspecting third party inspections of 
our government owned housing. As a matter of fact, my wife was 
informed Monday that my house is getting inspected Thursday. 
No--yeah, Wednesday or Thursday, and that they need three 
hours, and she had to schedule a block of time. So, that--I 
don't see that stopping. I think that accountability will 
continue to be important.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Is there a layer of onsite military 
oversight? Someone that when the company isn't calling them 
back, when they're not able to get in touch with someone, do 
you have a military layer of responsiveness?
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Yes. IMCOM for us, in the Army, is 
that belly button, if you will, at every garrison across the 
nation. The hundred percent inspection work orders amendment, 
that's the latest for the accountability there, and I'm happy 
to report now that actual people that live in those houses are 
sending in their own pictures of the work before the work is 
done. So, there is--there is tenant involvement in this to add 
another layer of accountability.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you very much. Master Chief.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Ranking member, I would 
start by saying I really do appreciate the three years that 
I've worked with you, and the relationship----
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea [continuing]. We've had. 
You've always been a very honest and upfront broker with me, 
and I appreciate it. But more importantly is that you've always 
made sure you put money, you know, where you say that your 
priorities are.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Also, you get after 
things, and so, with this oversight, which was largely due to 
your efforts, you know, we were able to hire an additional 200 
employees across the Navy, first in installation command to 
provide that type of oversight at the regional level and across 
our installations, and then also 50 of those employees are 
hired by our Naval facilities and engineering command to 
provide that type of oversight, and we were also able to then 
complete all of our third party inspections of all of our PPV 
housing this year, and able to report that the majority of them 
fall into a favorable condition, but that's about 50 percent, 
and a good 47 percent, and poor, and then a couple percent--
excuse me, in fair, and then a couple percent in poor.
    So, we'll continue to provide that type of oversight and 
those inspections to hopefully improve our conditions with our 
PPV partners. I am a proponent of renegotiating all those 
contracts based off lessons that we've learned. I think our 
business partner would do better if we could find a way to 
renegotiate those contracts.
    I know the government would be better served, and more 
importantly our families, and service members that reside in 
those housing would all be better served, much as we have done 
with our privatized unaccompanied housing projects. We took 
those lessons learned, you know, when we negotiated those 
contracts, and how we provide that oversight to ensure that 
there's good occupancy rates; that we are able to maintain the 
proper cash flow so that the partner has the solvency to 
maintain and to modernize those--excuse me--those investments 
as necessary. Thank you.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you. Let me just stress that 
the Chairman and I have been interchangeable over the last 
number of years, and we did all of those things together, and I 
appreciate his partnership.
    Chief, do you have any information on the reports that the 
Navy was blocked from inspecting houses in some cases by 
Balfour Beatty?
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. I don't--I do not have 
any information about any specific allegations. I do know that 
both the installation commander and their teams did go through 
all the housing down there at Key West. Our commander of Naval 
Installations Command has also visited and inspected many of 
those homes. We did a full inventory of all those homes, and 
determined a certain portion of them to be uninhabitable. 
Balfour Beatty paid for those members to be moved and placed in 
other homes or temporary housing, as necessary.
    But I don't have any other information about--maybe there 
were some more specific allegations that----
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Could you----
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea [continuing]. I am not 
aware of.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Could you look into that specific 
allegation for me?
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Yes, ma'am.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you. I will hold my applause 
for Balfour Beatty for the moment.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Yes, ma'am.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. The--yes, if we can continue, 
Sergeant Major.
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. Yes, ma'am. Similar, very similar to 
Sergeant Major of the Army and MCPON, Ranking Member, we also 
use that funding to hire oversight folks. So a little--118, I 
think, is the number.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Who are on site?
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. Who are on site, ma'am.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Okay.
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. We would hire them and then get after 
their training. So right after their training, and in addition 
to the third-party inspections also completed, looking to 
provide a report to my chain of command here, hopefully, this 
month. I hope that that is--that will be available.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. For those that have those positions 
in place, have any of you had those positions subject to the 
civilian or military hiring freeze thus far?
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. No, ma'am.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. No?
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. No, ma'am.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Okay.
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. Ma'am.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Chief.
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. For our department, that--I 
don't believe that is a categorical exemption. But we haven't 
seen any negative impact from the hiring freeze to report to 
you today.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. But some have been frozen?
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. Yes, ma'am. If we have a 
vacant position, it is not exempt from the hiring freeze.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Okay.
    Chief Master Sergeant Bentivenga. I don't know if there is 
any--but I am not 100 percent sure that we have currently 
vacant positions that we are trying to hire. I can take that 
for the record, but I don't know if we have any that would be 
affected by the hiring freeze.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. But only the openings, not people 
who are currently serving as far--okay.
    Then just with your indulgence, Mr. Chairman, I think we 
will probably only have one round, and I do want to ask about 
sexual assault because we can't address quality of life without 
discussing that scourge. The services have all made an effort 
to address the issue, and we know that a lot more progress 
needs to be made.
    The 2023 DoD Annual Report on Sexual Assault found a 
decrease in the number of sexual assault reports of 5 percent 
across services from 2022. The 2023 DoD Workplace and Gender 
Relations Report estimates 29,000 service members experienced 
unwanted sexual conduct in 2023. That represented a decrease 
from the last report in 2021, which included an 8.4 percent 
drop for women in the active duty force.
    But there was one outside estimate done by the Costs of War 
Project at Brown University that estimated the real prevalence 
of assaults was over 73,000 in 2023. That is a pretty major 
discrepancy. The number of reported assaults combined with the 
DoD prevalence data suggest a reporting rate of about one in 
four service members who reported their assault to DoD 
officials.
    I asked you all last year whether changes in the number of 
reported sexual assaults reflect a true change in the number of 
assaults, or whether those changes represent a--changes in 
service members' trust in the system and comfort level with 
reporting assaults. So if you can each tell me what steps you 
and your service have taken since last year to improve your 
insight into the sexual assault statistics collected, and what 
more needs to be done so that we can know that there is trust 
in the system of reporting and that we reduce the actual sexual 
assaults.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Thank you, Ranking Member, for that. 
Quickly--and I appreciate the discussion in--we had in your 
office----
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Yes, thank you.
    Sergeant Major Weimer [continuing]. About this subject. 
Frankly, it is a little better, but it is not good enough. As a 
matter of fact, I think this is one of those forever things, 
much like suicide, that we will battle forever----
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Right.
    Sergeant Major Weimer [continuing]. Unfortunately, but it 
is worth it.
    So our team has taken a deep dive into the Costs of War 
Brown survey. Our Workplace and Gender Relations Survey, that 
is an every two-year survey. There is some pretty consistent 
reporting there over time. I don't want to debate the 
methodology behind the Brown, but we are deep diving that and--
after our discussion.
    Right now we do see some differences in how they are 
comparing data, but that is like statistics. We are doing a 
deeper dive on that because, again, to your point, if there is 
some there there [sic], we need to know about it.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Right.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. So that is our commitment.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Based off that.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you.
    Master Chief.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Ranking Member, I would 
also like to thank you for your efforts in this space. Yourself 
and the Chairman have provided us the necessary appropriations 
to hire our integrated primary prevention workforce which has 
been those folks that are on the ground helping us better 
understand and solve some of our more complex issues in this 
space.
    I would echo everything that Sergeant Major of the Army had 
to say in regards to the Brown report, and I would encourage 
any member that would look to have a greater understanding of 
this problem to have a briefing from our DoD SAPRO. I had a 
really, really great conversation with him about all the data 
and the analytics behind that data to give me a lot better 
trust and confidence in all the things that we are doing at the 
DoD level as across our--as well as across our Navy service.
    So in the service we really focus on character development 
to make sure that we are building better people, better 
leaders, and better teams. Then through that we create the 
right climates and cultures with which we don't have those 
behaviors across that culture of harm that allow for those kind 
of bad actors to exist with inside our commands.
    The DoD helps us with the Defense Equal Opportunity Climate 
Surveys that ask all the right questions of our service members 
to get a better understanding of the trust, the connections, 
and the protective factors with--inside every command at every 
installation.
    When we recognize that there are problems, the DoD sends a 
team out to look into those--at those installations, with an 
on-site installation evaluation to determine where we have 
problems in the services and need to solve what some of those 
problems might be. Primarily we are doing that, as I said, 
through leadership or through the integrated primary prevention 
workforce.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you.
    Sergeant Major.
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. Ranking Member, thank you for that. 
This is--I think it was this time last year I came to see you, 
and you challenged me, and I took that personally, and I am 
here to tell you that I concur. It is not good enough still in 
2024.
    We really got after this in very different ways, I think. 
Using data, to your point, in our commanders course, in the way 
that we teach our command senior enlisted leaders before they 
take command, understanding the data in the command that they 
are stepping into and what they can do with the resources 
available, and the prevention folks that we have hired to get 
after, in their own way, in their own location, a base, a 
station throughout the force.
    This is why my initial opening comments about Marine Corps 
Total Fitness is so important to me, because it is about 
culture. It is about developing and strengthening those 
protective factors that we need to inject into our young 
people. Just because they graduate boot camp doesn't mean that 
they are done. We must continue to get after the development of 
the force.
    So I look forward to keep working with you. In 2024 we did 
some symposiums, forums, summits. We have not stopped getting 
after this issue, ma'am, and we won't.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you.
    Chief.
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. Ranking Member, thank you for 
the question.
    We continue to focus on this, and much like my colleagues, 
we are unsatisfied with any report of sexual assault or 
harassment in our service. It is counter to our culture and 
what we expect of all Airmen in the profession of arms.
    We have worked really hard, and we discussed this with you 
last year about prevention is way better than response. We want 
to get to the left of this problem. So we have--we established 
contracts across the Air Force and late last year in 2024 to 
modernize our prevention response training. It is updated based 
off of peer-reviewed research on current policies, protocols, 
and strategies tailored to the different leadership levels that 
exist across the workforce so we can identify concerning 
behaviors or emerging problems before it turns into a crisis.
    We have worked on our training and expanding our course 
evaluation measures across the enterprise, including, kind of 
like Sergeant Major mentioned, not just in basic training or 
our session pipelines, independent of how you joined the Air 
Force, but through our professional military education (PME) 
for both officer and enlisted. So across the entire spectrum we 
are launching out that new training through our PME spectrum 
through 2025.
    We are also focused on cyber harassment and technology 
facilitated sexual assault and harassment, a relatively 
emerging concern. But we want to ensure we have got that 
addressed in our training, as well. So we are really focused on 
the prevention aspects of this.
    We too have the integrated and primary prevention workforce 
effort underway. We have got over 1,000 people assigned to our 
installations across the Air Force already specifically focused 
on integrated resilience, primary prevention, sexual assault 
response. We are on track by fiscal year 2027 to fill 100 
percent of those billets across the Air Force as we grow out 
that requirement that came about from the Independent Review 
Commission.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you very much.
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. We are continuing to focus on 
it, ma'am. We appreciate your continued advocacy, as well.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you so much.
    Chief Master Sergeant Bentivenga. Ranking Member Wasserman 
Schultz, thank you for the question, and we spoke about this 
last week when we had the chance to talk.
    You know, a lot of the initiatives that Chief Flosi talked 
about are Department of the Air Force initiatives that include 
both the Air Force and the Space Force. To the integrated 
primary prevention policy workforce, I think we are over 80 
percent staffed right now, and we are working towards that. 
But, of course, those professionals that are able to do that, 
the market is really tight to be able to get the right people. 
I think that was a lot of the discussion is making sure that we 
have the right individuals with the right training who can help 
lead the service out of this scourge which is sexual assault. I 
think we all can agree, right, this has no place in our 
society. Most importantly, has no place in the one percent of 
men and women who serve their nation to do that.
    We have made a lot of strides, you know, from a Space Force 
perspective, and we talked about this last week. You know, for 
the Workplace and Gender Relations Survey, 2023 was the first 
time that the Space Force was separately broken out. So we did 
get some data from that.
    One of the things that was kind of heartening that I think 
is a good sign was that the percentage of individuals who have 
faith in their local leadership, who understand--that feel that 
they are confident that they can talk to someone and say, you 
know, I am being harassed, or I was assaulted, or they feel 
safe at the workplace was above the average across the 
services. But that was just one data point.
    You know, we look forward to other workforce surveys to 
make sure that we are trending in the right direction, but it 
is about making sure that this is not just a training 
challenge, this is a leadership responsibility. Most of us, we 
said that, you know, this kind of training is integrated at all 
levels, echelons of development. But particularly at the 
leadership level, whether it be squadron commanders courses, 
senior leader courses--excuse me--to understand that they are 
responsible for the culture in which they allow and which they 
create within their organizations.
    I think, beyond just training, saying that we have checked 
the box and we have training that we are getting after it, it 
is holding these leaders at every echelon accountable for the 
culture and the climate that they are creating to make sure our 
service members feel safe and are safe.
    Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will 
yield back so that we don't have a mutiny. [Laughter.]
    Thank you.
    Mr. Carter. Mr. Rutherford.
    Mr. Rutherford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    First, I want to thank all of you here this afternoon for 
your partnership, your responsiveness, your openness with me 
and my office. Thank you all for that. It has been interesting 
meeting with all of you.
    Chief Master Sergeant Bentivenga, I want to ask about 
STARCOM. Space Training and Readiness Command exists, I 
understand, to prepare combat-ready space forces through the 
deliberate development, education, and training of space 
professionals; develop that space warfighting doctrine, the 
tactics, techniques and procedures; and the tested evaluation 
of your capabilities.
    Now, I understand that in 2024 Space Launch Delta 45 
actually set the pace for space, as you all say, and was 
actually the world's busiest spaceport with 93 launches. That 
is amazing. So can you speak a little bit to the strategic 
importance of STARCOM, that fact that we just mentioned, and 
relocating STARCOM's headquarters to Florida and the quality of 
life investments that Space Force needs to make investments in 
to make sure that we not only get those professionals in, but 
then we retain them as well?
    Chief Master Sergeant Bentivenga. Yes. Thank you, 
Congressman, I appreciate it.
    Yes, 93 launches out of the 45th Space Launch Delta, and 
this year we are going to break 100. That is what we are going 
to do. This adds to my opening comments about just how busy the 
space domain has become, you know, when you talk about the 
number of launches out of the east coast range that we have 
there.
    But STARCOM, Space Training and Readiness Command, you 
know, as a strategic initiative, moving it to Patrick, you 
know, one of only three field commands that we have, and 
responsible for not only basic military training and 
assessments for officers, but the technical training, the 
development, the exercises, the simulation, the modeling, the 
doctrine is extremely important to the service, especially a 
little over five years into our journey.
    So partnering and having a basing decision to send it to 
Patrick Space Force Base and kind of join the space community 
that is in Florida is extremely strategic and important for us. 
There is a huge modeling and simulation community that is 
there, University of Central Florida. Also the National 
Training and Simulation Association is in the area. But in 
addition to that we have the Joint Services warfighting and 
training community there, as well. The Air Force Agency for 
Modeling and Simulation is there. The Naval Air Warfare Center 
for Training Systems Division is there, and Army Futures 
Command also has their synthetic training environment, all 
located within an area.
    So our decision and--you know, to kind of put it down there 
is because of the importance of training and developing future 
Guardians for the fight and for what the nation demands of us 
is going to take us to leverage the relationships not only with 
the other departments, with academia, but also with the local 
community. You know, especially when you talk about right 
outside within Florida, Space Coast Florida, as well, but very 
amenable and want to make sure they embrace the men and women 
who are coming down there.
    The ADVON team that is there right now, part of Delta 10, 
is about 57 personnel. But this summer, as we start to make 
some moves, we are hoping to expand to about 144 personnel to 
stand a flag-up, if you will. But in a few years we are hoping 
to have almost 500 personnel, professionals that are there 
building a foundation for STARCOM as we need it.
    The other importance of this decision and move is to allow 
Space Training and Readiness Command to start to invest in the 
talent, especially on the civilian side, now that they know 
they have a location where they can move their families to, 
they can start to build a relationship with the Space Force, 
but also build a relationship with their community. That is why 
that move is extremely important because, to your point, in 
order for us to attract and retain the talent that the nation 
has to offer, we have to offer them world-class training and 
prepare them for the high-end fight. That is the job of 
STARCOM, and we are excited about the move to Florida this 
year.
    Mr. Rutherford. Listen, I will tell you, you mentioned the 
synergy that that all creates, what is going on in central 
Florida. I know the ranking member is very well on that, too--
very well aware of that, too. It is an amazing opportunity, and 
look forward to that.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea, if I could talk to you, 
we talked a little bit about some of the TRICARE issues. On 
January 1 of 2025, TRICARE implemented its new regional 
contracts. This kind of goes back to the contract issue that 
the ranking member brought up about making sure we have good 
contracts. This one is known as T5, and it is with--Humana 
Military is the contractor for the eastern region, and Triwest 
Healthcare Alliance for the western region.
    In northeast Florida, where we have both--you mentioned 
Mayport Naval Base, and we also have Naval Air Station 
Jacksonville, which is the Fleet Readiness Center Southeast. So 
we have a lot of use for TRICARE in Jacksonville. That 
contract, as I said, began on January 21. Our family members 
there in Jacksonville deserve to have these providers, outside 
providers, available. But when I see providers not being paid 
by Defense Health Agency (DHA), myself and Congressman Bean 
sent a joint letter to DHA, you know, trying to get to the 
bottom of what is going on with these payments. When we have 
got providers--one is, I think, $100,000 upside down with DHA--
we potentially could lose some of these providers that our men 
and women need.
    So can you talk a little bit about how that can affect the 
readiness?
    Also, how can we improve TRICARE's relationship with these 
investors or providers?
    How do we write better contracts so we can force these guys 
to pay their bills on time?
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Congressman Rutherford, I 
certainly could not speak to the contract negotiation that was 
assigned by the Defense Health Agency and their leadership. But 
I can speak to, exactly as you are just describing, what those 
effects are to our people that are utilizing those services. 
Just as you described, as well as I described in my opening 
statement, that I have found many places where TRICARE is a low 
bill payer. So we are having difficulty attracting new TRICARE 
beneficiaries--excuse me, providers--for our beneficiaries, as 
well as I have taken a number of complaints from those 
providers in that they are not being reimbursed on time.
    Defense Health Agency, to their credit, you know, have 
worked diligently with me, with their contract to have those 
bills paid as quickly as possible.
    But as we are continuing through this transformation we are 
finding more and more places that were challenged with 
healthcare providers, and that is not just something that is 
unique to us with--inside the military service. That is--
everybody in our country is challenged with that, the 
difference being is that your sailors, your soldiers, Airmen, 
Marines, Guardians, and their families, we don't choose where 
we get assigned.
    Mr. Rutherford. Right.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. We are going to get 
orders for the Jacksonville area, and we are going to depend on 
the military health system or the extended health network 
outside our fence lines to see to our health care needs. When 
that can't happen, that is going to have detrimental effects to 
our family and to our family readiness, and possibly even to 
our military readiness----
    Mr. Rutherford. Yes, exactly.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea [continuing]. Especially 
if we end up having to spend military readiness dollars toward 
making that account whole and seeing to those benefits which 
are challenges that we are faced with today, sir.
    Mr. Rutherford. Thank you very much. I would love to be 
able to tell you what DHS-DHA's response is, but we haven't 
heard back from them yet.
    I yield back. I see my time is up.
    Mr. Carter. Mr. Bishop.
    Mr. Bishop. Thank you very much, Chairman Carter, Ranking 
Member Wasserman Schultz. Let me thank you for the opportunity 
to participate in today's hearing.
    A warm welcome to each of our esteemed witnesses, and I 
express my gratitude for your service to our nation. Your 
testimonies are invaluable for the decision-making that we have 
to do in safeguarding the welfare of our soldiers and their 
families and our national security. Although a question may be 
directed to one of you, I welcome input from all of you with 
respect to the questions that I ask if you would like to 
comment.
    Last year Congress worked with the Quality of Life Panel to 
approve and authorize a well-deserved pay increase for the 
servicemen, specifically the junior service members. But it 
seems that we failed to adequately review the resources that 
the service members use for essential services such as 
childcare and food programs. The pay increase moved these 
service members into higher pay bands, specifically for 
childcare, and it made them ineligible for SNAP or WIC 
programs, essentially canceling out the good intentions of the 
pay increase.
    Sergeant Major Ruiz, how are you tracking throughout your 
respective service the second and third-order effects of the 
pay raise, considering that the service is provided based on 
household income? I am most interested in child care and food 
assistance programs.
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. Congressman, thank you for that 
question.
    So April 1 was the first time that young Devil Dogs got a 
little extra on their paycheck, and greatly appreciate that. 
They appreciate you for pushing that so hard.
    What I would say is that we are watching it closely. 
Initially, via the numbers, the data tells us that without any 
change, maybe another spousal--different kind of employment or 
they get promoted again today, they would not climb no more 
than one bracket up towards the child care fees. That is what I 
have so far, sir. But as I watch this closely, I will come back 
to you to see if those unintended consequences are more severe 
than climbing up one more.
    I would imagine that for E6s and above, that the pay raise 
for them, just their annual increase, would likely jump them a 
little more because the pay increase is a little more 
substantial. So--but I will keep an eye on that, sir, and then 
I will give it to my teammates to see if anyone else has 
anything else.
    Mr. Bishop. Yes, sir.
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. Thank you, Congressman. I 
would like to also add we have the ability at the installation 
level to adjust those fees if there is a need. So while we are 
not terribly concerned with the potential to increase one 
bracket, it looks like it is a small number per month, under 
$50 per family. So it should not completely negate a pay 
increase. But if a family member, a service member and their 
family demonstrates a financial need through their chain of 
command, the local installation level command can adjust those 
fees. They have that authority to offset any financial crisis 
that may exist in some acute situation locally.
    Mr. Bishop. Yes, we worry about the stigma or the 
reluctance of a member to actually approach the command with 
that.
    Let me shift gears for a moment. I address this to, first, 
Sergeant Major Weimer.
    In your testimony last year you stated that ``not receiving 
predictable Federal funding and pay because of continuing 
resolutions exacerbates ongoing issues''. Add on top of this 
the uncertainty within the Federal workforce that often places 
organizations that provide critical care for our service 
members and their families [sic]. What is the impact on care 
funding or services in support of our military families and 
their families in light of the CR and the Federal workforce 
cuts?
    Do you anticipate--or how are you working to mitigate the 
additional burden on service members and their families because 
of a workforce drawdown?
    Are there any barracks or housing, child care centers, or 
other projects that provide specific care to our families, or 
that will be placed on hold or delayed due to a CR, the CR?
    Each of you can address that, if you can.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Congressman, thank you for that, and 
it is good to see you, and sorry we couldn't get our schedules 
to marry up here in the last couple of weeks.
    So first off, I definitely have to say thank you for the--
the 12-month CR is a little bit new territory for us, but we 
are grateful for some of the new start reprogramming, the--some 
of the above-threshold authority. But it is new territory for 
us. I don't know exactly how it is going to affect everything. 
We are not firing up star clusters right now on current 
projects. As far as some of the quality of life piece on the 
employee side, we are we are happy to report that our NAF 
employees have all been granted exceptions, and so we are 
hiring CDC employees. We have covered most of our medical 
folks. We do have some folks in our holistic health and fitness 
that we are sharing all our lessons learned with our Marine 
Corps teammates. We do have some freeze on some of our 
nutritionists and physical therapists, and so we are kind of in 
a hold. But we have been able to work well with OSD right now 
on the exceptions to get those people in there.
    I would say, first and foremost, anything that affects 
quality of life has been one of the things we have been asking 
for a waiver for first. Our Director of Public Works, DPW, as 
you have heard us talk about it numerous times, we are short 
quite a few people there, and that is currently frozen. So that 
is another one that we are trying to understand how that 
affects our infrastructure and quality of life.
    Mr. Bishop. Sir.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Congressman Bishop, 
similarly, as the sergeant major of the Army stated, the 
majority of our quality of life employees are non-appropriated 
fund employees, and we are not having any issues with hiring or 
losing any of those employees, and it is not going to have any 
effect on any of those programs.
    Now, the loss of fiscal year 2025 budget and CR, that did 
have a lot of effects on us. That is going to be--you know, we 
are not putting shovels in the ground to build new barracks, we 
are not putting shovels in the ground to build new CDCs, all 
those things that, as Chairman Carter mentioned at the 
beginning, that you all did the hard work for in appropriations 
and sending us that money, we are not getting any of that work 
done this year.
    Hopefully we will find good money in 2026 to get after all 
those projects.
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. Congressman, for the Corps I think I 
will start with six years ago Commandant Berger started the 
division of Force Design 2030. So six years ago we started the 
process of getting really light already, and getting after the 
platforms and things and the formations that we think are going 
to be needed for the future fight, and so we--that included our 
civilian infrastructure. So we are going to watch it closely.
    Yes, it affects--although I was able to hire a few, a 
little over 200 barracks managers, I won't be able to hire 
additional ones any time soon, and that is critical to 
maintaining the barracks that I have been able to refurbish. 
The ones that are hanging on by a thin thread, I won't have 
that so a Marine is instead in place, getting after the 
maintenance of a barracks instead of doing what they were 
assigned to do.
    I think in the recruiting and the accession pipeline, I 
would be concerned if the civilians that are assisting in the 
MEPS, in the processing of a young civilian into a Marine or 
any service members, if they are not there I am afraid that it 
would slow it down, the throughput, and the momentum that we 
gained in the last couple of years will be greatly reduced. So 
hopefully we get after those exceptions there.
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. Thank you, Congressman. This 
year--I will echo the sergeant major of the Army. We are 
thankful for a year-long CR, I guess, only to a government 
shutdown. So it is not a great option, but it is better than 
shutting down. So we are thankful that we have got that process 
in place. But it is not ideal for stability and planning, 
especially in our major defense acquisition programs, which I 
know aren't the major topic here.
    But as the CR relates to 2025 across the Air Force, that is 
where we saw the biggest--we have got a $3 billion top line 
disconnect that we have to close based off of the CR compared 
to the President's budget, and that--a large part of that is in 
research, development, test, and evaluation. We have got some 
military personnel (MILPERS) concerns that we are working very 
hard to protect, particularly in recruiting and accession 
pipelines. We believe--and we are on track today to meet our 
recruiting goals for fiscal year 2025, and we are going to 
protect that at nearly all costs.
    There is the potential that it could have some negative 
effects on some of our rotational forces, permanent change of 
station and things like that. But we have got to protect our 
ability to access the best Americans that we----
    Mr. Bishop. The CR compromises that?
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. The CR puts at risk a 
percentage of the MILPERS budget that we have to close. It 
doesn't specifically help us in any of those areas. So it then 
comes to the Defense Department to mitigate----
    Mr. Bishop. If it doesn't help, does it hurt?
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. It is--CRs are unhelpful, sir, 
in general. [Laughter.]
    Mr. Bishop. Do they hurt or they help?
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. We are working hard to protect 
those foundational parts of building our pipeline.
    Mr. Bishop. Yes, sir.
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. We have--we are very thankful 
for our congressional plus-up we got in the previous fiscal 
year to robust and grow our recruiting pipeline to the tune of 
nearly 500 new recruiters across the Air Force, and what we 
don't want to lose is that momentum. So today we have got the 
most--we have got the largest delayed enlistment program. 
Basically, they are young Americans that are waiting to come 
into the Air Force. So we put them into this thing called the 
Delayed Entry Program (DEP). Our DEP numbers are as big as they 
have been in over a decade. We do not want to lose momentum 
there. It is critical to our ability to execute the national 
defense strategy.
    Mr. Bishop. You are very diplomatic.
    Yes, sir.
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. I get paid to execute the 
decisions you make.
    Chief Master Sergeant Bentivenga. Congressman, thanks for 
the question. As I said in my opening comment, unfortunately, 
living under a CR is, you know--over 51 percent of the time as 
the service has been in existence, we have been under a CR.
    But specifically to your question, in 2025, especially when 
it comes to quality of life, like, there were improvements 
supposed to be made at the Peterson--one of the Peterson child 
development centers, one at Patrick. In 2025 we are looking for 
money to start design phase, put money against that. We are 
also supposed to start doing design work on dorm improvements 
at Buckley Space Force Base.
    As we are working through the reprogramming for the budget 
for 2025, you know, these are all things that could be put at 
risk. This is why the stability of funding is so important to 
the planning phase to execute, especially when it comes to 
quality of life initiatives, to make sure we stay on time, on 
target, to deliver that quality of life to our service members.
    Mr. Bishop. Thank you.
    With that I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Carter. Mr. Guest.
    Mr. Guest. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Gentlemen, thank you 
first for your service; thank you for joining us today for this 
important oversight hearing.
    Master Chief Honea, Sergeant Major Ruiz, I am proud to 
represent the Meridian Naval Air Station. Sergeant Major Ruiz, 
I understand that you have recently visited the Meridian Naval 
Air Station, that the base--it has both a Navy and Marine 
mission. Last year in the fiscal year 2025 budget hearing I 
raised the fact that there was an important barrack repair 
project there on the facility, and proud to say that, based 
upon calling attention to that, the project has been moved up 
into the fiscal year 2026 budget cycle. Planning is already 
underway for that.
    So my question is not just for the project there at the 
Meridian Naval Air Station, but for all of our military 
installations. How do we ensure that the throughput of students 
at those facilities is not adversely impacted during times of 
major repairs, during times of renovation, particularly where 
we have facilities where things such as temporary housing, 
modular structure, the renovation of other buildings are not 
either able to take place or not able to take place easily?
    I just wanted to get from both of you your thoughts on, 
again, making sure that we are not throttling the throughput of 
students during these times of major renovations or repairs.
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. Congressman, yes, thank you for that. 
I did visit down there, and I absolutely loved it, and I loved 
it because it doesn't--I am just never--I guess I am just 
tired. I am not going to be surprised anymore of what Marines 
can do with so little, really. They just really get after it.
    Although this is a Navy project, we are working very close 
with our shipmates to ensure that those buildings get 
refurbished. What I would hope, like we have in other places, 
is that we have the ability today to not just stop the entire 
building from being lived on, but wing by wing we are able to 
work by refurbishing room by room, and therefore reducing the 
stress on the Marines, moving them to an even worse place while 
the entire barracks gets rebuilt. I have seen it done in Camp 
Lejeune, I have seen other places where the modular structures 
come into play, and we move Marines there while we do the 
entire building.
    So I will work closely with our Navy shipmates here to 
ensure that hopefully we are able to do that so we don't lose 
track and momentum on those young folks who we desperately need 
in the fleet Marine forces today. Those gaps are real, and we 
are not any less busier than we ever have been before. So the 
faster I can get into my formations, the better we can get 
after warfighting.
    Mr. Guest. Master Chief.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Congressman Guest, so we 
use data and analytics to help us solve our recruiting 
problems. We will continue to use data and analytics and 
mitigations to make sure we are getting all those people as we 
recruit through recruit training command, and then pushed on 
through the rest of their accession training.
    So Naval Education and Training Command has used data and 
analytics to understand what that throughput needs to be, where 
we need to increase capacity in those schoolhouses, and 
increase capacity in their living accommodations, anything 
necessary so that we do not end up with a bottleneck. Wherever 
they find problems, we come up with mitigation strategies. Such 
as Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps was explaining, if we 
need to we will move over into other facilities, we will take 
over permanent party housing, if necessary, and move permanent 
party personnel to another location where we have to to make 
sure that we accommodate our accession training and we don't 
end up with a bottleneck. You know, back to Sergeant Major's 
point, so we get them back out to the fleet as quickly as we 
can.
    Mr. Guest. Yes, sir. Last question for you, Sergeant Major. 
The Marine Corps has the Barrack 2030 initiative. One, I just 
want to ask if you can just generally talk about that 
initiative, and then also--and a little bit more in-depth--talk 
about how the Marine Corps is working with Navy leadership to 
improve housing that may not be necessarily on a Marine Corps 
installation, but where Marines are being housed at Navy 
installations.
    So I will ask you if you wouldn't mind answering that 
question, and then once I have that answer, Mr. Chairman, I 
will yield back.
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. Congressman, thank you for that. 
Barracks 2030 is the commandant's vision. Although it is 
labeled ``barracks,'' sir, it is about infrastructure, and it 
is about--I think what the GA report did for us is we were able 
to start from a place of data that I know exactly where in the 
globe I need to put the funding that we get from you and use it 
effectively and more efficiently.
    So, because we know exactly our problem areas and we can 
more intelligently put it to work in--anywhere that Marines 
live, we work hand in hand with our Army buddies or--it doesn't 
matter because the senior enlisted leader and the commander of 
those spaces, they are responsible. So they get after ensuring 
that the overall well-being of those service members under 
their command--it does not matter what uniform they wear, 
because from that it produces a better version of that soldier, 
Airman, whatever, you have it, because all of us are in one 
team, sir.
    Mr. Carter. Ms. Escobar.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman and Madam 
Ranking Member, for this hearing.
    Gentlemen, thank you so much for your service. Thanks for 
the time you took last week to visit with me and others. I have 
the--have had the incredible privilege of serving on the House 
Armed Services Committee, and serving on that committee's 
quality of life panel. Many of you came before us last year to 
talk about quality of life, and I am privileged to be on this 
committee and this subcommittee to be able to take all of those 
lessons learned and apply them on the MILCON side.
    I also want to say I have the incredible privilege of 
representing Fort Bliss, which is one of our nation's premier 
military installations. Working with leadership there over my 
three--now my fourth--term in Congress has been the highlight 
of my service. So I am grateful to all of you for your 
leadership, as well and everything that you do to help inform 
our decisions.
    I have been really alarmed by the mass firings, deep cuts 
to personnel, but also the year-long CR, which has a direct 
impact on our nation's military, on leadership's ability to 
plan ahead, on--the impact it has on our contractors who depend 
on their ability to plan for the future and to have some 
stability. I really hope that Congress understands the negative 
impact on our military every time there is a CR. So I just 
wanted to get that off my chest. Thank you for allowing me.
    I am going to focus on the Army. So Sergeant Major Weimer, 
you and I had a great conversation. We--as we talk about our 
MILCON obligations, and the backlog, and the incredible need 
that leaders like you relay to us, we have to figure out better 
ways to stretch the dollar and be more efficient with the 
funding that we provide.
    There was a mention a few minutes ago about data. Data is 
so important, and I can tell you some of the data that I have 
seen locally. When we look at MILCON investments at Fort Bliss 
and we compare them to non-MILCON investments, but regular 
investments, either via the university for housing and compare 
that to military housing or local government's investment in 
health care building hospitals versus what the Federal side 
spends on building hospitals, there is a real opportunity for 
us to find more efficiency.
    The data I have seen demonstrates that we are spending up 
to five times more money through Federal spending on similar 
infrastructure projects than what local governments are 
spending. So there is great opportunity for us to do more and 
to learn from that and to be innovative.
    Sergeant Major, you and I talked specifically about 
integrating intergovernmental service agreements for major 
military construction, scaling up privatized barracks 
construction, land lease for industry to facilitate 
construction of non-military facilities like child care 
development centers or administrative office buildings. We also 
know on Fort Bliss really cool, innovative projects like 3D 
printed barracks--we really have a great opportunity here.
    Sergeant Major, can you speak to the utility of 
implementing more creative mechanisms to meet our military 
construction needs, especially at mobilization force generation 
installations like Fort Bliss?
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Yes, Congresswoman, let me look at 
that clock real quick. There is a lot there. Thank you for the 
meeting we had. It was fantastic. I really do appreciate your 
energy and others' energy when it comes to helping us find 
creative solutions during things like CR--there, I said it, I 
can get it out of the way--but also where we are with our 
MILCON and MILCON reform that we really do need some assistance 
with.
    Like any good organization, we have to look internally 
ourselves first, right? We can't just immediately ask for 
legislation assistance, although there is some space there 
where we could use some help. But we also have to look at, 
like, our own force protection. We have added some crazy force 
protection measures that are a bit legacy, in my opinion, and 
others before we closed off our installations. But we are still 
paying for those additional costs.
    Some of our construction costs increased 50 percent. Every 
state is a little bit different. I don't really want to talk 
labor laws in agreements, but that is a factor in this also. We 
can't even get construction workers onto the installations 
because of their Federal records, and so they are continually 
changing the construction workers, and so you have delays. I 
could go on and on.
    But the--but I guess I would like to say creative solutions 
are fantastic, and we are never going to stop working with you 
and anyone else that is willing to help us and the Corps of 
Engineers in that space. But really, a lot of those are Band-
Aids in--I think, to true MILCON reform. So I would love to 
work with you on this in the future.
    Ms. Escobar. Count on it. That will be a priority for me. 
It is a priority for me. Not just Army, but across service 
lines, because as we see budget constraints going forward and 
we compare those constraints to the needs and the demands, the 
people who pay the price for our inability to be creative and 
thoughtful and strategic in terms of our reforms and our 
creative approaches, it is those families who end up living in 
sub-par conditions or are active duty service members who have 
to deal with the inadequate responses.
    So I have--when I spoke with each and every one of you, I 
mentioned that as a priority. That is something I am--my team 
and I are really going to dig into. I really appreciate your 
collaboration. Again, I appreciate your time today and your 
service to our nation.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. Ms. Bice.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, 
gentlemen, for being with us this afternoon.
    I keep hearing the phrase from my military friends, ``on 
time and on target. Well, my time is only five minutes, so if 
you could keep your answers fairly short, that would be really 
helpful to be respectful of my colleagues who still have 
questions they would like to ask.
    Master Chief, I want to start with you. My colleague and 
I--Chrissy Houlahan--worked to extend parental leave for our 
service members, and we realized that sometimes it is a 
challenge for our service members to be able to take that leave 
within a one-year timeframe. We are looking to extend that to a 
two-year timeframe. Could you talk a little bit about the 
benefit that your service members could have by extending that 
time, and how it would be easier for you to manage the 
workflow?
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Congresswoman, I 
appreciate the question, but I really appreciate your 
willingness to engage into this conversation, because I do 
believe that if we could expand that to two years or have some 
conversation, we could figure out how to get there. It would be 
extremely beneficial. It is very challenging for someone to 
execute parental leave on top of their normal leave that they 
accrue through a year, all with--inside that one year.
    Mrs. Bice. So that flexibility would be helpful to you.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. It would be extremely 
helpful. There you go. I will be succinct. Thank you.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you.
    Does everyone agree with that, that the two-year timeframe 
would be helpful to being able to manage that workflow? I see a 
lot of heads nodding. Thank you for that.
    I want to say Chief Master Flosi, thank you for the phone 
call. We had a great conversation. We talked a lot about 
infrastructure. One of the things that you alerted me to was 
that you have a lot of buildings that are currently vacant--
1,200, to be exact, is that correct?
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. Yes, Congresswoman, that is 
correct.
    Mrs. Bice. My understanding is that the DoD demolition 
budget is $75 million for all of the branches. Is that correct?
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. Ma'am, that sounds accurate.
    Mrs. Bice. Do all of the branches have--maybe not Space 
Force, since they are fairly new, but do all of you have 
buildings that are currently vacant that you would like to have 
as part of a demolition project, but cannot because the funding 
is not there?
    Sergeant Major Weimer. We do----
    Mrs. Bice. Sergeant Major.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. We do, Congresswoman.
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. Yes, ma'am.
    Mrs. Bice. Yes. I think that we need to highlight that 
because what happens is--it was mentioned earlier--there is a 
10-to-1 return on investment for demolishing these buildings. 
It is taking, I believe, resources away from your branches to 
be able to upkeep these facilities so that you can actually 
perform your missions. I want to encourage our folks that we 
are--when we are looking at our appropriations package to 
potentially increase that so that we can raze some of these 
buildings, take the workload off of your plates, and allow us 
to continue to really focus on the mission at hand.
    Let me pivot slightly. Chief Master Sergeant Flosi and/or 
Master Chief Honea, you talked a little bit about child care, 
and that is something that I know I have been interested in. I 
had the opportunity to do a bipartisan sort of swap with my 
colleague, Sara Jacobs, from San Diego. There were two things 
that really were eye-opening to me in visiting her district, 
and that is it is expensive to live in San Diego if you are a 
service member and there was virtually no child care 
opportunities for those service members that are living on 
base.
    Can you talk a little bit about--you talked--you mentioned 
in your testimony that the--you had the highest number of, you 
know, sort of individuals that are using child care services on 
naval installations currently. We need to continue to work at 
that. But is there something different that you have done to 
get those numbers up?
    Then if Chief Master Flosi wants to expand on that.
    Master Chief Petty Officer Honea. Congresswoman, yes.
    One of the things that we have done to really draw down on 
our wait list besides building the facilities and staffing 
them, is that we really are encouraging the use of fee 
assistance and allowing our service members to find adequate 
child care in the community so that we are not continually 
fighting with the local community for the same staffing. That 
has quickly alleviated a lot of our wait list, and it has 
helped us solve this problem much quicker.
    Mrs. Bice. Perfect. Chief Master----
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. Thank you, ma'am.
    Similar in the Air Force, we have, first of all, improved 
staffing, which is really one of our constraints. Sometimes it 
is not a capacity problem with infrastructure, it is staffing. 
We have gone from 72 percent to 86 percent staffed across the 
Air Force in the last 3 fiscal years, and due in no small part 
to some of the reimbursement incentives that we are able to 
offer.
    Now all employees--it used to be direct care only, but we 
have a 100 percent reimbursement rate for child care for a 
dependent of one of our employees in child care facilities. So 
that is great. I think we are implementing that across all 
services now.
    The community-based child care fee assistance, we have got 
7.8 thousand children enrolled in those community-based fee 
assistance, which is a great force multiplier for us, and it is 
win-win for our local communities, where we can help with the 
local economy by supporting the local economies in which our 
Airmen live and work, and it also--that fee assistance to the 
tune for the Air Force is around $33 million last year. So 
providing that incentive provides our Airmen the ability to 
seek quality care that is equivalent to on base when we do have 
constraints with our child development centers (CDC). It has 
been really helpful.
    We have over 400 homes in the family child care program, 
and our Air Force offsets the fees and certification process 
for service members' families to get certified to watch 
children in their own home. So another win-win with spousal 
employment----
    Mrs. Bice. Yes.
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi [continuing]. As well as child 
care for your own family, primary care provider keeping their 
family in. It helps with our 24/7 mission for our Airmen that 
work off-duty hours.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you for that. I appreciate your succinct 
comments.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield.
    Chief Master Sergeant Flosi. Thanks, ma'am.
    Mr. Carter. Thank you, Mrs. Bice, a good demonstration of 
how this should have been run.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you. [Laughter.]
    Mr. Carter. Mr. Levin.
    Mr. Levin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to everyone.
    I particularly want to thank our Marines and sailors. I 
have the great honor to represent Marine Corps Base Camp 
Pendleton. I have visited, and I am very grateful for all the 
leadership on base. There is a lot of progress being made with 
limited resources, but still far too many of the barracks are 
run down, they need a lot of help, and we want to do all we can 
to help as part of the Barracks 2030 initiative. You certainly 
have my commitment to do that for as long as I have the honor 
to serve, to do everything we can for--they don't call it 
quality of life, they say ``operational necessity, which I 
think is right. Call it readiness, call it, you know, whatever 
we need to get the job done to make sure that people have a 
clean and safe place to live.
    I wanted to ask about rising costs in the context of the 
Barracks 2030 initiative, specifically things like construction 
costs. Sergeant Major Ruiz, thank you for the time that you 
spent with me the other day. To what extent, you know, as the 
construction costs have gone up, does that change the approach 
of the Marine Corps?
    Do you, you know, have to focus on, you know, only 
implementing part of Barracks 2030, as opposed to the original 
plan?
    Can you comment more on the impact of construction costs?
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. Sir, thank you for your time earlier 
in the week. Absolutely.
    I think what I will say is that we labeled it Barracks 2030 
because we were in a hurry, right, at the beginning of our 
commandant's tenure to get after getting our infrastructure 
correct. Now, as the budgets develop, we--it may slip, right? 
So although this was never to be a one-fit-up issue--we can get 
things up and running in one fit-up--it is a multiple-year, 
multiple fit-up endeavor. The Marines that are serving today 
may not likely ever see a brand new building go up in the first 
contract of their service.
    So, to the credit of our commandant, even through these 
budget conversations he continues to tell the leadership that 
we will find the money, and we will invest into the operational 
need of getting after the responsibility we have to house the 
Marines in a manner that is deserving their excellence, sir.
    Mr. Levin. Thank you, Sergeant Major. I was told, as I 
mentioned to you, just on Camp Pendleton over 120 buildings, 
roughly half of them need to be completely redone or torn down 
altogether at a cost of over $1.2 billion. This is for one 
base.
    So a question for any of you: Have any of you done any sort 
of analysis on the impact--I am going to use the T word--of 
tariffs on construction costs as it pertains to your plans?
    No? Nobody? Nobody.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. I would say the Corps of Engineers, 
I know, has been paying attention to this. I mean, I won't 
speak for them, but I will say we are taking a look at this. It 
does affect every one of our projects in the sense of the 
availability of product--of equipment for the projects.
    Mr. Levin. What sorts of stuff do you import that might be 
more expensive as you look at the portfolio of projects? Is it 
materials? Is it--just to put a----
    Sergeant Major Weimer. It is a little bit of everything, 
Congressman. A past one we had, prior to the T word, was solar 
panels. There were only so many places that we were able to 
purchase solar panels, and so we had to request an exception or 
that project was just going to sit and languish and not be 
completed, and you can imagine a project that has been a multi-
year project and we are waiting on solar panels to finish it, 
close it, and occupy it.
    So, I mean, that is one from the past that I am aware of. I 
don't think we have the analysis for current effects based off 
tariffs, but I know the Corps is paying attention closely.
    Mr. Levin. Very good, and hopefully, you are conducting 
that analysis. I really hope that, as you develop it, that you 
share it with us. You know, our hope is to be as helpful to you 
as possible, but we need you to be transparent with us as we 
seek to help.
    The cuts--or the other thing I want to mention, a couple of 
my colleagues talked about this. So the same question for 
Sergeant Major Ruiz is, you know, this budget cut, how does 
that impact the Marine Corps ability just to implement the 
barracks improvement plans that you have on the books?
    What additional resources might you need?
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. Yes, sir. As I stated earlier, we 
began six years ago on a very huge endeavor to transform the 
Marine Corps. So we got really light. What I would offer now is 
that it is not just--should the budgets develop in maybe a 
downward trend, it won't be just barracks and infrastructure, 
it will be the inability to pay for bonuses, and retention may 
turn, may be affected because we have incredibly talented 
Marines in our formations that are needed to stay for the next 
fight. If they see--they may see that, hey, I have waited my 
turn to get a bonus because I did what I was supposed to do, 
and now I am here as an E5, getting ready to recover a bonus 
and stay, and it is not available to them. They may decide to 
walk away.
    So although our retention numbers--even this year we are 
already 100 percent and climbing for the goal of the year. I am 
not looking to break that momentum, Congressman, and I am 
looking to have that available in the MILPERS.
    Mr. Levin. Thank you. I am over time, but I just want to 
sincerely thank all of you for the work that you are doing. I 
think all of us on this subcommittee are here to help you in 
every single way that we can.
    So with that I will yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Carter. Mr. Franklin.
    Mr. Franklin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all, 
gentlemen, for your time here today. I really appreciate the 
work that you do, you all do, on behalf of the hundreds of 
thousands of young men and women that are--that put their faith 
in their leadership, their chain of command to take care of 
them, and you all do that magnificently.
    For the sake of time, I do want to dive a little bit into 
retention and recruitment. I brought this up in previous 
hearings in past years. The Army and the Marines--both of our 
sergeant majors addressed it, so I will--just for the sake of 
time, I will limit to you two.
    But Sergeant Major Ruiz, the Marine Corps, it looks like 
everything is going very well from what you were just sharing 
there, but you exceeded your 2024 goals in retention, which, as 
we know, retention is just as important as bringing them in. If 
we can't keep them, then we are going to have problems down the 
line. Then so far, through fiscal year 2025, you are at 98 
percent of first-term retention and 108 in subsequent. So it 
sounds like you have got everything going well. If there is 
more to that, I would love to come back and hear what still may 
concern you.
    But Sergeant Major Weimer, I want to dive a little bit more 
into your testimony. You had shared that you had a goal for 
fiscal year 2024 of 55,000. You all finished the year at 
55,150, so you squeaked that one over the goal line, which 
sounds good. But, you know, on closer look you also shared that 
the retention was 52,289 for fiscal year 2024. I am not sure 
what the goal was, but the goal for 2025 is 54,800. So I don't 
know if you were short of the mark on the retention.
    But, you know, there was a Military.com article last 
month--and I understand it is the press and, trust me, there is 
a lot of things that the press doesn't always get right, and I 
see it day to day, but I want to share a little of that and 
just kind of get your comment on it. The article was titled, 
``The Army is Losing One Quarter of Soldiers in the First Two 
Years of Enlistment'', so pretty big drop-off after we get them 
in the door.
    They further unpack that, and there is conversation about 
the pool of eligible recruits out there. We get that. We have 
had these conversations here before. Only 23 percent of 17 to 
24-year-olds are eligible to be--to serve in our military. Only 
eight percent are eligible for a clean enlistment. That scares 
the heck out of me, that 92 percent of kids in America couldn't 
serve in the military, even if they wanted to.
    But within the Army last year waivers doubled from 8,400 in 
2022 to 17,900 last year, so more than double the waivers. Most 
of those were medical waivers. I would be interested to hear 
your thoughts on that. Were these fitness standards? Was it 
obesity? Are there other underlying conditions? I do--I know 
that there is a greater ability to find out a recruit's medical 
history now coming in that we may not have had before if they 
had lied to you before that you weren't going to find out until 
it manifested.
    But concerning to me, you know, last year there were 1,045 
that were recruited that were brought in with misdemeanor 
waivers but, worse than that, 401 with felony convictions, 
which was 4 times the amount from 2022. I do appreciate that 
none of those were for sexual violence. But one question. I am 
curious what kind of convicted felons are we allowing in, and 
how do we--and how do you explain that to moms and dads whose 
sons and daughters are going off to know they are going to be 
sharing the bunks with convicted felons? That is kind of not 
what we promise in the recruiting commercials.
    But how do we make the argument that we are not lowering 
standards if we barely squeak by the goal, and we see the 
number of people who don't meet--haven't traditionally met the 
standards, or they are bringing in criminals?
    So I will stop there and give you a chance to unpack that a 
little bit for me.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Thank you. Thank you, Congressman, 
for that. There is a lot there. I will try to touch on a little 
bit of all of it.
    We met our goal last year. We absolutely did. Future 
Soldier Prep was an important part of that. But not everybody 
that goes to Future Soldier Prep passes Future Soldier Prep. I 
think it is important to understand the standard hasn't 
changed. Future Soldier Prep gives our sons and daughters--I 
have to be careful how I say that, it is our sons and 
daughters--an opportunity to potentially serve. Because based 
off of--blame COVID, blame something--they just didn't have the 
propensity that we have had in the past. I don't want to be too 
accusative there to our sons and daughters, but that has been 
incredibly successful. But they don't all make it out of Future 
Soldier Prep. But we do invest in them and then send them home.
    To the felony comment--because I want to make sure I don't 
run out of time on that one--I will take that one for the 
record.
    Mr. Franklin. Okay.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Because that one is new to me. But 
Military.com----
    Mr. Franklin. Just reporting what was----
    Sergeant Major Weimer [continuing]. Is not new to me.
    Mr. Franklin [continuing]. What was in the article.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. That----
    Mr. Franklin. But that is what they said. Basically, your 
felony----
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Yes.
    Mr. Franklin [continuing]. It was quadruple what----
    Sergeant Major Weimer. I will take that one, sir.
    Mr. Franklin [continuing]. It had been two years before.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. I will take that one. That one 
stings a little more than the rest of that, because I agree 
with you, especially with a daughter that will be commissioned 
here in two years.
    This year's mission, just as U.S. Army Recruiting Command 
says, we are crushing this year. We raised it to 61,000, and we 
are exceeding where we were last year on goal to surpass our 
recruiting mission of 61, with potentially one of the largest--
delayed entry, just like my Air Force teammate down here--one 
of the largest delayed entries we have seen in decades. So 
recruiting is going really well right now.
    I will finish with retention. Retention is not about 
contracts. For us in the Army we met our retention goal of over 
114 percent last year. We don't set 100 percent of retention as 
a goal for us. We set a very specific mission, and then 
evaluate ourselves. Not all soldiers are going to make it 
through their first term. That is just statistically factual, 
decades of data. And----
    Mr. Franklin. I have been to captain's mast enough with 
young sailors to know that, too, so----
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Yes, and it is okay, and all--it is 
not all by the--it is not always UCMJ that gets young troopers, 
either. Sometimes it is just the lifestyle in the military is 
just not for them, and we help them transition out.
    But I will say the first and second-year comments in that 
article, the statistics are no different than anything we have 
seen in the past.
    Mr. Franklin. Okay.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. So it is not a Future Soldier Prep 
new data point seeing first-time soldiers fail at a higher 
rate.
    Mr. Franklin. All right, I appreciate that, and for all of 
you, if--as we see these retention or recruitment numbers going 
up, let's do make sure that if there have been places like high 
school education or other things where we have made concessions 
in the past, we know historically that doesn't work well in the 
long run. I would love to see us tighten those standards back 
up again.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. Mr. Alford, you are batting clean-up.
    Mr. Alford. All right, let's do it. Thank you. Everyone 
ready for lunch? All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I 
appreciate that and our distinguished witnesses for being here.
    As representatives of our military senior enlisted ranks, 
you have a direct pulse on the everyday experiences of our 
service members and their families, the challenges they face, 
and the sacrifices they make. We have a duty to ensure that 
those who defend our great nation have a quality of life that 
reflects the values of their service, from housing conditions 
to child care. We must identify where we are failing and take 
action to fix it. We cannot underserve those who have 
sacrificed and continue to sacrifice for us.
    Missouri's 4th congressional district is home to two great 
bases, Whiteman Air Force Base and Fort Leonard Wood, two 
critical DoD installations that embody the heart of our 
military readiness and resilience. I have heard firsthand from 
service members about the difficulties they face, and I want to 
make sure that we try to get to some answers on how to fix 
things.
    As a former member of the Armed Services Committee, I also 
sit on the quality of life panel under the direction of General 
Bacon, and we made significant gains in the 2025 NDAA, and a 
big increase in pay for lower-level enlisted, a restoration of 
basic allowance for housing. We were instrumental in getting 
$144 million for new AIT barracks at Fort Leonard Wood, better 
child care access, and more mental health support.
    My first question to Sergeant Major Weimer, you mentioned 
the Army Future Soldier Prep course. It has been a success in 
channeling--in getting more recruits into Fort Leonard Wood, in 
particular. We are having five new companies. Talk about the 
level of success in particular for this program, why it is 
important.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Thank you for that, Congressman. By 
the way, Fort Leonard Wood, they call it Fort Lost in the 
Woods, but I don't think that gives it--it is not a fair----
    Mr. Alford. We are trying to get away from that, sir.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Yes, it is a gem.
    Mr. Alford. Yes.
    Sergeant Major Weimer. Every time I go there I understand 
why people just keep retiring there and becoming members of the 
community. So thank you for that.
    Future Soldier Prep has been instrumental. There are 
currently--I think it is 33,500-ish sons and daughters that 
have gone through Future Soldier Prep, and every time I go down 
there, if you haven't had an opportunity to go visit the--
either Fort Jackson or down at Benning, please do. We are 
meeting these young kids where they are. For many of them, they 
just want an opportunity to meet the standard.
    It is a little--it will tug on your heartstrings. I will 
just tell you that.
    Mr. Alford. Well, there is a nasty rumor going around that 
this program could end. Have you heard any talk about that at 
the Pentagon or anywhere else?
    Sergeant Major Weimer. No. In the Army, this program--we 
may throttle the program. Like, we need to use the program more 
at times and then there are times we may not, and so you may 
see the Army, as we continue to meet our recruiting goals, 
exceed our recruiting goals, you may see us turn it up or turn 
it down a little----
    Mr. Alford. Right.
    Sergeant Major Weimer [continuing]. Bit based off that 
requirement.
    Mr. Alford. Thank you.
    Chief Master Sergeant Ruiz, thank you for coming to my 
office. I had a great conversation with you in particular about 
mental health issues. Would you repeat some of the challenges 
that the Marine Corps is facing now when it comes to mental 
health?
    Sergeant Major Ruiz. How do you like that, Jim? Chief 
Master Sergeant. [Laughter.]
    Congressman, thank you for that excellent discussion on the 
ability for a young service member today who does exactly what 
we tell them to do, which is you are having an issue, seek 
help. Because the medical providers may not be in the volume 
that we need in--at different places around the Corps, around 
our bases and stations, they must go out in town. Out in town, 
it is--we need TRICARE, to the previous conversations about 
TRICARE, sir. If they are not available, then it just 
exacerbates the problem. Now I am waiting, if I am that young 
person, 45 days to 60 days to finally get the one appointment 
that I need down the line. You did exactly what we told you to 
do, which was go get help, right?
    I can't solve that problem, sir. I am looking for you to 
help us bring attention to that. I love that everyone is 
tracking and pushing for that. What I can control is what is 
inside my formations, and that is why Marine Corps Total 
Fitness, for us, is--it is a way to get after the resiliency of 
our force, strengthening their soul.
    So thank you for allowing me to do that, sir.
    Mr. Alford. Well, thank you, and with my 25 seconds left I 
would like to thank your wife for being here today. Spouses are 
so important. Family is so important to service.
    Also thank you, ma'am, for being here today. God bless you 
all. Thank you for being here.
    With that I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. Thank you. I am sorry we went long, but, quite 
honestly, not too long. I really like to hear from you guys, 
and so I am kind of lax on you. Now, when I get the big boys in 
here, I will keep them on the level. But you guys tell the 
stories that make us actually realize what is going on. So 
thank you for what you have done for us. You are the people 
that keep--your branch of the military going. God bless you for 
doing it, and we wish you the best.
    With that I will adjourn.
    [Whereupon, at 12:43 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    
    
                           W I T N E S S E S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Bentivenga, Chief Master Sergeant John F.........................    95
    Prepared statement...........................................    97
Flosi, Chief Master Sergeant David A.............................    87
    Prepared statement...........................................    89
Hamilton, Keith..................................................    12
    Prepared statement...........................................    14
Healy, Thomas....................................................    20
    Prepared statement...........................................    22
Honea, Master Chief Petty Officer James M........................    69
    Prepared statement...........................................    72
Morrow, Dave.....................................................     4
    Prepared statement...........................................     6
Richardson, Brent................................................    28
    Prepared statement...........................................    30
Ruiz, Sergeant Major Carlos A....................................    78
    Prepared statement...........................................    80
Weimer, Sergeant Major Michael R.................................    58
    Prepared statement...........................................    60

                                  [all]